# Sad story-Sanibel Causeway accident today



## LMD (May 7, 2011)

SANIBEL, Fla. - A woman is dead after an accident that closed traffic on the Sanibel Causeway on Saturday afternoon.

The Florida Highway Patrol said Tracey Klienpell, 46, of Fort Myers, was on a bicycle heading toward the island when she was hit by a vehicle heading toward mainland Lee County.  The impact of the crash sent the woman over the side of the bridge railing and into the water below.  

A boater nearby pulled the woman from the water and brought her to shore, however witnesses and first responders were unable to save her.



Read more: http://www.winknews.com/Local-Flori...ng-knocked-off-Sanibel-causeway#ixzz1Lisy7C5R


----------



## Talent312 (May 8, 2011)

Sad news, indeed, but who was on who's side of the road?
It's likely this would not happen, if they were in their own lanes of travel.

_... too bad they don't still have the ferry from days gone by._ <sigh>


----------



## LMD (May 8, 2011)

*Accident*

Here is a more detailed story

http://www.news-press.com/article/2...-thrown-off-Sanibel-Causeway?odyssey=nav|head


----------



## pedro47 (May 8, 2011)

What a very sad story one day before Mother Day.


----------



## JeffW (May 8, 2011)

Talent312 said:


> Sad news, indeed, but who was on who's side of the road?...[/I] <sigh>



"...was pedaling south on a paved shoulder when a northbound SUV driven by Theresa Lynn Shirley, 46, of Bokeelia, crossed into Kleinpell’s path..."

Sounds like the bikes were travelling correctly, and the SUV was the one at fault.  

Considering the SUV not only crossed into southbound vehicle lane, but also the southbound shoulder, sounds like it was lucky the SUV didn't drive completely off the bridge.

Jeff


----------



## learnalot (May 8, 2011)

JeffW said:


> "...was pedaling south on a paved shoulder when a northbound SUV driven by Theresa Lynn Shirley, 46, of Bokeelia, crossed into Kleinpell’s path..."
> 
> Sounds like the bikes were travelling correctly, and the SUV was the one at fault.
> 
> ...



It doesn't say that the bicyclist was traveling on the southbound shoulder - only that she was "pedaling south".  The fact that it doesn't specify almost makes me think she was on the northbound shoulder.  

A tragic story in any case.


----------



## Talent312 (May 8, 2011)

Yeah, I have to wonder if the cyclists were not on the shoulder on the wrong-side facing traffic for some reason. Its easy for a driver who is inattentive or distracted (cell phone, texting, dropped mascara) to drift onto the shoulder.

Completely crossing another lane of on-coming traffic on a causeway would signal a loss of control which would have likely been mentioned.


----------



## theo (May 9, 2011)

*Not unsympathetic, but...*

Let me first say that I am a bicyclist.

Let me next point out that in the eyes of *the law* in most states with which I have any direct personal knowledge and experience (...which includes Florida), a bicycle is regarded as a "vehicle" and is accordingly subject to all of the laws applicable to any other vehicle. This includes, just for example, stopping at stop signs --- and *operating on the correct side of the road*.  

I spend a number of weeks each year in Florida and do a fair amount of bicycling when there. To my chagrin (and personal jeopardy) I see many cyclists in FL routinely riding on the "wrong" side of the road, thereby placing other cyclists in jeopardy when those other law-compliant cyclists have to (simultaneously) avoid the cyclist on the wrong side of the road *and* avoid being struck by an approaching automobile while performing these evasive maneuvers.  

That said, it's also the responsibility of an automobile operator to stay in their lanes. This task and responsibility, as Talent has astutely observed already, is much more difficult to fulfill while holding / yammering on a cell phone, or texting, or applying lipstick or mascara (no gender bias implied or intended, as I've also seen guys shaving while driving).


----------



## Lets Get Going (May 10, 2011)

*Stopping at stop signs?*

Thanks for saying this. I've often wondered what the rules were for bicycles.  I've never yet seen one, or even a group of them, stop for a stop sign and it scares me to death.  I'd hate to be the one they hit.  When I lived in So Cal I watched many groups of cyclists run stop signs AND red lights without a care.  Scary.


----------



## theo (May 10, 2011)

*Your mileage (and state law) may vary...*



Let's Get Going! said:


> Thanks for saying this. I've often wondered what the rules were for bicycles.  I've never yet seen one, or even a group of them, stop for a stop sign and it scares me to death.  I'd hate to be the one they hit.  When I lived in So Cal I watched many groups of cyclists run stop signs AND red lights without a care.  Scary.



To repeat a point stated initially, it is actually *individual state law* that determines whether a bicyle is legally defined as a "vehicle" and, as such, subject to all of the same "operating" laws as a motor vehicle. That is indeed the case in Florida.

I do not / did not claim to know about California at all. California seems to be a place where *many* things are done....ah....er...._*differently*_.


----------



## stevedmatt (May 10, 2011)

Talent312 said:


> Yeah, I have to wonder if the cyclists were not on the shoulder on the wrong-side facing traffic for some reason. Its easy for a driver who is inattentive or distracted (cell phone, texting, dropped mascara) to drift onto the shoulder.
> 
> Completely crossing another lane of on-coming traffic on a causeway would signal a loss of control which would have likely been mentioned.



Drifting into the shoulder or crossing a lane are both a loss of control. The situations you describe above as "easy" are all negligence. Even if the cyclist was wrong, if the driver was out of their lane, they were also wrong.


----------



## Talent312 (May 10, 2011)

stevedmatt said:


> Drifting into the shoulder or crossing a lane are both a loss of control. The situations you describe above as "easy" are all negligence. Even if the cyclist was wrong, if the driver was out of their lane, they were also wrong.



I was not suggesting that either course of conduct was excusable (they aren't), just that drifting to the right was a more plausible scenario.

We have a sizable cycling population in my locale, but over the years, far too many cyclists have been injured and killed by drivers who failed to pay attention, one who said he "fell asleep," and a few who did not appreciate that a cyclist has the same right to the road that they do.


----------



## Lets Get Going (May 12, 2011)

*Calm down...*



theo said:


> To repeat a point stated initially, it is actually *individual state law* that determines whether a bicyle is legally defined as a "vehicle" and, as such, subject to all of the same "operating" laws as a motor vehicle. That is indeed the case in Florida.
> 
> I do not / did not claim to know about California at all. California seems to be a place where *many* things are done....ah....er...._*differently*_.



I was just making an observation.   You sound offended and if you were, I apologize.  Geez...maybe you need to take that bike out for a ride and clear your head.


----------



## theo (May 12, 2011)

*Howzzat now???*



Let's Get Going! said:


> I was just making an observation.   You sound offended and if you were, I apologize.  Geez...maybe you need to take that bike out for a ride and clear your head.



No offense was taken and certainly no apology is necessary or appropriate.
I was merely trying to reinforce the critically important point that there is *no consistency among states* as to the legal status of a bicycle as a "vehicle". No more, no less...


----------

