A traffic "incident" with a happy ending (for me at least)

[dmethvin]

Today was a really nice day here in Maryland so I went out for my first long ride of the year (about 18 miles). On the way through downtown Columbia I have to cross a really wide intersection that has 6 lanes of traffic. I was at the lower left where the orange cones are (they've finished work now) and as soon as the crosswalk sign was on I started out across the intersection. I got across to the middle island with no problem but there was a lot of traffic headed towards me and turning right (in the lane that heads directly into the camera).

Now, since I'm in the crosswalk I have the right of way so I am moving ahead slowly waiting to get the attention of a driver so they will actually give me the right of way so I can get to the other side. This one guy in a massive SUV stops so I start moving ahead, then he starts going again! Then he seems to actually see me and stops again. The woman behind him doesn't expect him to stop (certainly couldn't see around his massive SUV to see me) and whacks him in the bumper. 

Since I was a witness to the accident I make it across the street and stop to be sure everyone is okay and give my name if needed. The guy in the SUV hops out and accuses me of causing the accident! I explain to him that I was in the crosswalk and had the signal, and he says well he had a green light and I "came out of nowhere" so it was my fault. Then some third guy comes out of his car and says "that's a motor vehicle, you shouldn't have been in the crosswalk!" I try to explain to him that although it has a motor, it's not classified as a motor vehicle in Maryland. You can guess how well that went.

Fortunately, there were a bunch of cops about half a block away because it's near Merriwether Post Pavilion and a concert was starting soon. So I suggested that the third witness in the car go get one of the cops. In a couple of minutes the cop was there and he asks Mr Angry SUV Man to give his story. It was pretty funny. The cop asks, "Was he in the crosswalk?" Mr Angry says "Yes." "Did he have the signal?" Mr Angry says "I don't know." I point out that as we speak you can see that the crosswalk signal is green when the traffic light is green. The cop says to Mr Angry, "Well you need to let pedestrians cross." 

Here's the part that really made me happy. Mr Angry says, "He shouldn't be riding a motor vehicle on the sidewalk!" The cop says, "No, it's a pedestrian device, he can ride it on the sidewalk." (That's the term they use for an EUC or Segway here in Maryland, "pedestrian device".) Mr Angry asks, "Doesn't he have to walk it across the intersection?" The cop says, "No, he doesn't have to dismount, he only has to do that if it's a bike."

So I head on my way while the cop gets the two people in their cars to exchange insurance information. After that, I'm really starting to wonder whether I should ever stop in cases like that. And also I need to get a new camera, my old one only has about 45 minutes of battery time so it would have not been running if I had tried to record the whole trip anyway.

 

[radial]

Yes, new camera, stat!  I'll be riding in MD soon, and one of my must-haves is going to be a camera with enough capacity to cover even the longest of my trips.  As a new transportation modality, we are going to be colliding with all the other ones.  Video seems like the best way to make sure that the people who adjudicate these conflicts have all the facts they need to make good decisions.  

[Rehab1]

Oh wow! Saturday excitement everywhere! Bummer on the GoPro! I would love to have seen Mr. Angry's face!

22 minutes ago, dmethvin said:

Here's the part that really made me happy. Mr Angry says, "He shouldn't be riding a motor vehicle on the sidewalk!" The cop says, "No, it's a pedestrian device, he can ride it on the sidewalk." (That's the term they use for an EUC or Segway here in Maryland, "pedestrian device".) Mr Angry asks, "Doesn't he have to walk it across the intersection?" The cop says, "No, he doesn't have to dismount, he only has to do that if it's a bike."

Love it! See cops are good people! He called it a Pedestrian Device. Awesome! The PD likes your PD.... give it a few seconds!

 

[MetricUSA]

Same kind of incident, I am crossing 6 lane and a car, same direction as myself tried to turn right after I was already crossing, right in front of me THREE times, almost hit three times same Asshole person. Pediatrician always have right away...

[kasenutty]

1 hour ago, MetricUSA said:

Same kind of incident, I am crossing 6 lane and a car, same direction as myself tried to turn right after I was already crossing, right in front of me THREE times, almost hit three times same Asshole person. Pediatrician always have right away...

They help sick kids for gods sake

[Dingfelder]

Cop sounds awesome.  Hope you gave him the respect he deserves.

[meepmeepmayer]

14 hours ago, dmethvin said:

After that, I'm really starting to wonder whether I should ever stop in cases like that.

That's a bit of a strange conclusion. Sure you should stop, if you are a witness and could help the guy who after all braked for you (sure he should have seen you in advance, and if he braked twice unexpectedly he is in part guilty of the accident, not just the lady who hit him). No reason to leave people alone just because one happens to be an asshole who does not understand how green lights at turns work.

Also, bikes (as in bicycles) have to be walked on crosswalks? What kind of bike-hostile **** is that?

[dmethvin]

3 hours ago, kasenutty said:

They help sick kids for gods sake

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

[dmethvin]

2 hours ago, meepmeepmayer said:

Also, bikes (as in bicycles) have to be walked on crosswalks? What kind of bike-hostile **** is that?

I assumed he was talking about this case, for left turns a bicycle can act like a pedestrian or a vehicle, described here: http://www.sha.maryland.gov/index.aspx?PageId=357

• Make Left Hand Turns Safely: You may turn left as a vehicle by moving into the left side of the travel lane (or left turn lane) OR cross like a pedestrian by stopping, dismounting, and walking across crosswalks.

[Hunka Hunka Burning Love]

Darn I got a whoooole different picture in my head after reading that thread title.    Nevermind, carry on, carry on.   Oh that reminds me I got at an appointment at the massage parlour at 2.

[meepmeepmayer]

@dmethvin Ok thanks, that makes sense, I interpreted that wrong.

[esaj]

ZOMG, @dmethvin's alive! (OK, after checking your profile, you've posted here and there even during this year )

[Marty Backe]

Great story and conclusion. Plus 1 for EUCs 

BTW. explaining that it's not a motor vehicle never goes well, at least for me. People are pretty headstrong in this regards.

[MaxLinux]

I usually carry my wheel when crossing an intersection like this. I feel that I can look around better and react better to unexpected situations.

[Chuts]

This intersection rule in the USA really doesn't make sense to me.  I understand how it works but it disagrees with my logic on how traffic and pedestrian right of way should work.

Nether the less, good that the outcome of this incident was in your favor.

[J.T.]

On 4/29/2017 at 9:49 PM, dmethvin said:

The cop says, "No, it's a pedestrian device, he can ride it on the sidewalk." (That's the term they use for an EUC or Segway here in Maryland, "pedestrian device".) Mr Angry asks, "Doesn't he have to walk it across the intersection?" The cop says, "No, he doesn't have to dismount, he only has to do that if it's a bike."

That's so great to hear, and glad it worked out for you, go @dmethvin!  Do you, by any chance, have a link to any Maryland law that explicitly states the legality of the "pedestrian device?"  I've searched high and low for one with no luck.  It would really be something helpful to have for one of our rides in the DMV area.  It's also one of the reasons I haven't hosted a ride in Maryland yet.

[dbfrese]

18 minutes ago, J.T. said:

Do you, by any chance, have a link to any Maryland law that explicitly states the legality of the "pedestrian device?"

Unless I'm missing something, it looks like Maryland Law officially uses the term “Electric personal assistive mobility device” or “EPAMD," just like most other states, and they are defined as "two nontandem" wheeled like most other states do. It looks like technically electric unicycles are not included in the law. Looks like @dmethvin got lucky! 

Here's a link to the appropriate section:

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2017rs/statute_google/gtr/21-101.pdf 

 

[dmethvin]

Yes, @dbfrese is right that you could exclude an EUC on technical grounds even though a big fat two-wheeled Segway would be okay. I think most people see that wouldn't make sense, especially because a Segway can go faster and takes up more room on the sidewalk. At this point plenty of local law enforcement have seen me in Maryland, Virginia, and the District and none of them have ever questioned whether it's legal.

I think the reason they like the term "pedestrian device" is that it makes things clear that even though the thing has a motor and is a vehicle it's not a "motor vehicle".

[dbfrese]

15 hours ago, dmethvin said:

 

15 hours ago, dmethvin said:

At this point plenty of local law enforcement have seen me in Maryland, Virginia, and the District and none of them have ever questioned whether it's legal.

I've never been questioned by LE officers anywhere in Arizona either, but there's always the possibility of a hard-nosed cop wanting to show an EUCer who's boss by writing a ticket for "driving on the sidewalk" or some other nonsense offense. Your judge would probably not be able to stretch a definition that specifically says "two wheels" to include a device that only has one wheel.

Another concern is in civil court. If you had been injured in the traffic incident, and you needed to recover medical costs from the driver of the SUV, the defendant's lawyer could use the statute's language to keep you from recovering any damages. Since there is no mention of one-wheeled self balancing devices in the law, they have no defined rights or privileges (like being able to use sidewalks and crosswalks). They essentially fall into a legal "twilight zone." Even having GoPro video of the incident would not be of any use at all.

 

 

[J.T.]

19 hours ago, dbfrese said:

Unless I'm missing something, it looks like Maryland Law officially uses the term “Electric personal assistive mobility device” or “EPAMD," just like most other states, and they are defined as "two nontandem" wheeled like most other states do. It looks like technically electric unicycles are not included in the law. Looks like @dmethvin got lucky! 

Here's a link to the appropriate section:

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2017rs/statute_google/gtr/21-101.pdf 

 

@dbfrese, perfect!  I'm glad Virginia and DC sections are written such that EUCs fall under their existing wording.  Good to see that the police officer @dmethvin encountered interpreted the wording intuitively rather than literally.  Thank you!