A video doing the rounds on social media shows the shocking moment a motorcyclist speeds up the inside of an HGV in Colombia, smashing into a cyclist riding along the hard shoulder.
Information from the crash scene, believed to be on Sunday, suggests both the cyclist and motorcyclist escaped serious injury, the former was pictured shortly afterwards sat on a wall at the side of the busy road between the capital Bogotá and La Vega.
The bicycle rider had been violently knocked off when the motorcyclist, part of one of the many groups who reportedly travel the route at high speeds, undertook an HGV and collided with the rider using the hard shoulder. The motorcyclist then took out another member of their group who was also uninjured.
Footage from a cyclist passing the scene shortly after shows the motorcyclists' damaged bikes lying further up the road as another group of bikers speeds past.
According to Colombian national newspaper El Tiempo, so far this year 473 people have been killed in traffic incidents in Bogotá — 75 of those cyclists and 200 motorcyclists — and the shocking nature of the video has prompted calls for action on road safety.
One local rider said little is done to stop speeding motorcyclists in the area, to the point where he has stopped riding on the road where the crash happened due to the danger.
"And next Sunday they will be back, nothing is going to happen," Andrés Felipe Vergar said. "As for me, for years I have reduced my training in this way. A pity as it is a very good place to train, but on several occasions I experienced situations like yesterday [Sunday]."
Add new comment
33 comments
I'm done with this site. The headline for this article is a dead giveaway that road.cc cares about sensation and "shock value" in the pursuit of site traffic opposed to instituting change or actually helping these people. It's exploitative and opportunistic.
Has road.cc every donated profits towards initiatives for safer roads, infrastructure, etc? What is actually getting done with this vertical of content? I'd love if they were making good use of the revenue they're surely generating by PLASTERING every page with ads, but can't imagine they are.
Wow, that's a really short fuse! One post and can tolerate the site no longer. We'll cope
Like a rare species of frog or a white dwarf going supernova, we first learned they existed at the moment they no longer did.
I didn't even have time to say that you can get rid of (most) of the adds by subscribing...
I clicked on the headline, "Speeding motorcyclist smashes into cyclist in shocking footage" and what I found was an article built around a video containing shocking footage of a speeding motorcyclist smashing into a cyclist. I feel so misled.
I'd love to tell you but I have literally no idea what this means. Anyway, welcome and cheerio and thanks for taking the trouble to inform everyone that you've arrived and left, super.
I mean what good is this content doing? Road.cc posts this kind of content all the time, but seems to literally do nothing to help mitigate/solve the problems its reporting on.
Yeah, I know right?
I was reading about the weather on BBC and then thought "what are the BBC doing to fix the weather?". I mean what are we even paying them for?
Vertical of content? I quite like that. What does it mean?
It's like a quantum of sausage but more concrete. And not as tasty.
Ah. it makes sense now. Thanks
Content verticals = internal language for different genres of content on a web property or site (re: the review vertical; the professional racing vertical; etc etc). Writers for the publication will know what it means.
Oh.
I think I might have discontent horizontals.
Yep, I signed up specifically to call out this garbage, sensationalist content.
Whatever dudes. Enjoy your weird and sensationalist "car hits cyclist" porn instead of actually getting involved and doing something at a grass roots or political level.
You appear to have confused road.cc (a news / interest site, with a side helping of "asking the odd awkward question of police, politicians, not-very-pro- or anti-cycling folks") with one of these worthy organisations:
https://www.roadpeace.org/
https://www.cyclinguk.org/ (e.g. Cyclists defence fund etc.)
https://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/ (a bit dormant ATM I belive)
(insert your local cycling organisation here)
You also appear to have confused "people who post on the internet" with "people who only post on the internet". Which is understandable.
Anyway I'm off to recycle myself as an odd-looking orca with dubious wands, must do one's bit. It's been a blast!
I have no idea what you're talking about or trying to contribute.
Hold on a minute - this is porn? Boy have I been grabbing the wrong end of the stick
Wait - don't go!
So you've been triggered by "clickbait" on this site? You've created an account specifically to apply some sweeping generalisations and have a dig at folks in the comments?
By your own definition you're exactly the person we need!
Alternatively - if seeing the bad thing here has triggered you to get off the internet and get (more?) involved in cycle campaigning (I assume?) I am delighted. Good luck! Also - good work inspiring activists, road.cc!
Videos of people getting hit by cars for clicks. I mean come on people, it's the TMZ of cycling.
Be better! Or just be horrific leaches within the hellscape we all inhabit! Good riddance to this site.
You must commute in Birmingham too, I feel your pain.
I think it was that slalom cycle path that did it. Although it's "Leithers", not "leaches".
I don't know what is the legal framework over there, but I see many of the things that a motorway has like central island with 2 lanes per direction, no at grade junctions, emergency lane and distance from urban areas. I wouldn't ride there because drivers would be easily expected to reach 100km/h or even more, and in many countries it would simply be illegal.
Of course the motorbikers were a pack of morons, but this is the exact place where morons like to be. Be smart and try to avoid morons, especially if you are going to ride for recreation thus being able to select your route.
Extremely lucky nobody went under the truck.
Modal separation would have prevented this.
I'm not sure giving Motorcyclists their own infrstructure will stop some of them riding like complete dangerous bellends.
Of course not, but they won't be endangering anyone but themselves.
Afterall if everyone thought like that it would result in cyclists being denied basic infrastructure because some of us ride on the pavement and through red lights... Oh wait
Err no. If the motorcyclist had followed the basic rules of the road it would have prevented this.
Well duh..
You can add that to the list of things that will only happen in a perfect world, in the mean time we need changes that have been proven to make a difference in the real world (see: Dutch infrastructure.)
How can this be blamed on the cyclist? Hogging the lane? No. Wearing dark clothing? Nada. Not wearing a helmet? Nope. This is frustrating, there must be something. People who burn fuel, or discharge batteries, in order to travel are just axiomatically more advanced, more adult, and thus cannot be expected to look out for those who childishly use their own muscle power to get around. Hold on, the motorbikers are in full leathers, with knee and elbow pads. So why should "holier than thou" cyclists get to use our public roads without such protection. For their safety (and also to make me feel better that I risk injuring or killing someone every time I put the ignition key in my vehicle) they should be made compulsory.
Busy day for the insurance companies...
Pages