Maybe the Sparling family was thinking that. But were they also thinking that their loved one should have been less reckless and probably should have had a light on their bike and possibly some reflective clothing of some kind.

In response to the article in the paper, I'd also like to ask; If I don't see a bicycle in my path how long should I wait before I make a right turn? Should I always assume that there is a bike there and only make left turns?

This circumstance is really really sad. No doubt about it. But I think they made the right decision in NOT placing the blame souly on one person. It is absolutely a motorists responsibility to look but it is also a biker's responsibility to make themselves seen.

i wonder if the driver would have been cited if they hit a car and not a bike. Seems to me that drivers forget that a bike lane is like any other lane of traffic.. i didn't see this accident happen, but i've seen many reckless drivers who don't look, or even think to look.. as a pedestrian in this city, i've often been close to being hit because drivers turn with out a thought to whether or not there may be someone crossing the street or driving in the bike lane.

So how hard is it to check your blind spot? I'm sure when it comes to adjacent cars you do (or at least I hope) take the effort to check blind spots before acting. When you make lane changes from the left to right lanes on the freeway do you just assume that you won't clip another vehichle?

Don't worry, just give it a few seconds and everything will be safe and sound.

Give me a fucking break.

I drive downtown everyday, but I am turning into a little old person at a rapid clip. I've been driving in Portland for over 30 years without a ticket - so far.

Three weeks ago, in the early evening and in the rain I turned that corner on Burnside + 14th and spotted Tracey's ghost bike out of the corner of my eye.

I had not checked my mirror and I am certain, if I had, I would have missed seeing another bicyclist just like Tracey. I could have killed someone.

This corner has joined a growing set of corners where I will no longer drive. I don't drive on SE Ankeny anymore. I don't drive on NE Vancouver at rush hour. I avoid 17th between Glisan and Jefferson. I am hyper-vigilant on Stark Street between 12th and 39th.

As a driver and as an occasional bicyclist, I support the city designating roads for bicyclists. Portland = Bike City USA would be great and the city should support it.

But please - in Tracey's memory - find these areas where bikes can't be seen and illuminate them, designate them! Bikers wear lights and bright clothing!

I don't want to hurt someone.

i imagine the driver-sympathizers also feel that drunk drivers and serial killers suffer enough in their hearts just knowing they've killed someone.

obviously these drivers don't set out to kill people in the prime of their lives. but by breaking the law, just like drunk drivers, drivers who ignore lane markings and turn without signaling do indeed kill innocent people.

i don't understand why people who insist that cyclists dot every i suddenly become consequence-averse when it comes to drivers who kill people.

Jami, what does any of that have to do with the Sparling case? The driver of the auto in question was neither drunk or a serial killer. ...and your knee is going to get sore if you keep jerking it like that.

Motorist, what does your suggestion that Tracy should have been wearing reflective clothing and a bike light, since Tracey was killed in broad daylight and the driver stated that he was unable to see the bike lane at all?

The Portland Police and the DA have lowered the bar of safety considerably in stating that a motorist has the right of way if they if they are unable to check a blind spot on their vehicle. If a driver is unable to see if there is anyone next to them, they should err in favor of safety, and simply not make that turn at that location, rather than turning without knowing what they may be running over.

Before this devolves into a "cyclists don't stop for stop signs..." / "one time I saw this lady on her cell phone driving an SUV..." bickerfest, I'll say this:

I can't imagine how terrible it must be to unintentionally kill someone with your vehicle. Awful. But to imply that it trumps your daughter being crushed by a cement truck...or actually BEING crushed by a cement truck? Wow.

My understanding is that these trials determined whether or not there was criminal negligence on the part of the motorists. In both cases Sparks determined that there was not. That doesn't seem entirely out of line to me. They still can and SHOULD BE issued citations for the law that they so clearly (albeit unintentionally) broke: "Failure to yield to a bicycle in a bike lane" (ORS 811.050). If we don't enforce these laws...no wonder folks don't know they exist.

(Also: While there's a big difference between what is "safe" and what is "legal," it should be noted that both Tracey and Brett were killed while riding legally in bike lanes in broad daylight.)

If I don't see a bicycle in my path how long should I wait before I make a right turn?

This doesn't seem like a tough question. My car has blind spots, but I can see areas around them—I can see what's further behind me (both directly and to each side) down the road. I can see how fast those vehicles/bikes/pedestrians are moving, and realize when they'll clear.

It seems like a minimum of common sense to check the spot you (and your mirrors) can see, and—whether there's someone there or not—be sure that traffic or potential traffic has cleared. That's enough time for any of the traffic you can't see, in your blind spot, to have cleared ahead of it.

That's the reason I can't get Sparling's case out of my mind. If you know you have a blind spot, and you know it overlaps a traffic lane, don't you wait the extra 20 seconds or so to ensure that anything you can't see has cleared? While this will certainly weigh on the driver's mind for a long time—I've heard he's moved out of state, and is torn up about Sparling's death—does this occur to drivers who haven't yet killed someone, but could? How do we reach them, and make it crystal clear that those who share the road with vulnerable users must be certain that their path is clear?

Does anyone else remember the S.M.O.G. acronym from drivers ed?

Pretty straightforward.

Signal, Mirror, Over the shoulder (as in check your blind spot visually), Go for it.

Been working for me going on 18 years now.
Thanks Mr. LaFortune!

How do you reach vulnerable users and make the dangers of blind spots crystal clear?

The onus should be on the driver with the blind spot, and I belive that it is, to be aware that the blind spot exists and drive his vehicle in a safe manner accordingly.

That people like the above motorist fail to accept responsibility for poor driving habits is one reason why the driver who killed Tracey should be prosecuted.

That truck driver did not need to turn at that intersection, since he could only do so in an unsafe manner. What that driver should have done was to proceded to another intersection where he could have made a turn in a safe manner.

OK, got it. No more right turns.

You folks just keep parking yourselves in the blind spots of giant vehicles. After all, maybe it will end up being the drivers fault after you die?

Someone call this man "despicable," already, will you?

My next project: Figuring out why Oregon doesn't have a vehicular homicide law. Here's Washington's, via wikipedia:

(1) When the death of any person ensues within three years as a proximate result of injury proximately caused by the driving of any vehicle by any person, the driver is guilty of vehicular homicide if the driver was operating a motor vehicle:

a While under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, as defined by RCW 46.61.502; or
b In a reckless manner; or
c With disregard for the safety of others.

I don't think that the driver meant to do it, but it does seem weird after the death of a person that there isn't a punishment of some sort meted out by the law. When drivers complain of cyclists and pedestrians it just strikes me as weird, because it comes across as if their rush to get somewhere quickly supersedes their responsibility to be safe in the environment around them. Cars can kill, bicycles can't, so it seems obvious that the onus should be on the driver. It feels like pedestrians are being asked to watch out for cars and while true it's not absolutely on the pedestrians and cyclists to avoid accidents by themselves alone. Somehow it feels lopsided towards drivers' rights or something. It's fucked up. Slow down and be aware drivers.

Might be valuable to point out that the blind spot in a dump truck or cement truck is far larger than that of a regular car. Trying to make comparisons between the two doesn't make much sense.

Let me get this straight. The investigations found no criminal negligence but you still want someone to be prosecuted anyway?

There are limits to preventing accidents. The simple physics involved here set up a dangerous situation. That's neither the driver's or the cyclist's fault. We could completely separate cars/trucks and cyclists. That will ensure that no cyclist ever dies from tangling with a car or truck and no driver will ever suffer a lifetime of guilt for not having gotten out of their vehicle, walked around to check for cyclists, gotten back in and hoped that none appeared before making their turn.

Let's look at what reasonable steps could be taken to prevent these kinds of accidents in the future. Humans are fragile and fallible. Perhaps technology can be improved to prevent this. Maybe that intersection should have a flashing sign warning of pedestrians and cyclists. That seems like the best outcome at this piont.

I shudder to admit, if I were approaching a right hand turn and didn't see a cyclist in the bike lane, I could have done the same thing. I don't feel that prosecution of the driver for vehicular homicide would bring relief to Sparling's family. Ruining another's life doesn't seem sensible to me in this case.
What exactly can be done to prevent this kind of accident from happening again? Perhaps an awareness drive- billboards with a diagram of exactly this right hand turn/ hidden bike scenario? Or perhaps if blinking lights were put up at busy intersections with bike lanes, with signs warning drivers to watch for bikers before turning, it would start to become more second nature for motorists to do so even at other intersections. Or what about those big mirrors like they have on narrow curvy roads in Europe? They could be aimed at the bike lane, and the driver would be able to easily check it (and have no excuse afterward, for those of you who would like to see a citation.)

No, I don't know where all this money for these ideas would come from. But I especially like the mirror idea.

I don't necessarily think that the driver in the Sparling case should be prosecuted, though I do think Oregon needs to get a vehicular homicide law on the books (one was introduced late in the 2007 session, and went nowhere).

What bothers me is this black hole—someone who was following the laws and engineering on our streets died. Who's accountable? (Not 'who needs to go to prison?')

It's very possible it's the truck manufacturer, or the city that striped a bike lane and slapped a right turn arrow to the left of it, or the driver who didn't wait to make sure anything that could be in the blind spot had a chance to clear. I'm not sure we're going to get an answer.

Another case where there isn't clear fault. Look, I drive to work cause I work in the burbs. I have no other option. I bike most everywhere else if there isn't ice out. I can make a case where cyclists are just as at fault for their decisions as drivers. You have to cycle defensively the same way a driver has to drive with their eye out for cyclists. The big difference is when I am on a bike I am not surrounded by airbags and steel. I ride with that in mind. I know the laws are there and what the laws are for cyclists. I never ride thinking a driver gives two shits about those laws. None of them will do me any good if I'm dead. I'm not going to blame the driver for this and I'm not going to blame the cyclist. It was an accident. One person already paid for it with their life and trying to make a witch hunt to ruin another won't help.

If you want the honest truth...I wouldn't have stuck my bike out like she did. I wait until I make eye contact with a driver before I go.

Yeah, what Garrett said. I admit I came off too harsh up there, but I did get Matt Davis to call ME "despicable" which is no easy task. I must have been born under a really bad sign....

Let's ALL be careful on those streets. Once yer dead (or you have to live with the agonizing fact you killed someone) it doesn't matter who is at fault. You're f*#cked either way.

Arguing on the internet is silly. Road safety is not. Keep alert, get back to work and stop typing.