Tag Archive for Alex Thompson

Today’s post, in which I’m blindsided by a former friend

Alex Thompson makes his feelings clear.


You’ll have to excuse me, but for once, I don’t even know what to say. Until recently, I considered Alex Thompson a friend and an ally in making the city’s streets safer for cyclists.

I say until recently, because he’s made it clear that’s no longer the case.

His choice, not mine.

I respect Alex. I liked Alex. I’ve supported his efforts at Bikeside and linked to his commentary; even when on those rare occasions when I’ve personally disagreed with his comments, I felt they were worth wider consideration.

And I’m linking to him today, as he unveils the first in what he promises will be a five part attack on some of the things I’ve written, as well as on me personally.

I don’t intend to get into an online flame war; that’s one of the things I hate most about the internet. And while I disagree with much of what he has to say this morning, I don’t think you’re interested in a point-by-point rebuttal.

So I wish Alex well.

If he really wants to attack me, then fire away.


Stephen Box criticizes LADOT’s new sharrows for placing cyclists in the door zone, and allowing drivers to pass too closely; oddly, he seems to hold the LACBC somehow accountable for LADOT’s engineering. Meanwhile, BAC Chair Glenn Bailey notes in an email that LADOT didn’t bother to inform the city’s own Bicycle Advisory Committee about the sharrows, and that, for now at least, they only stretch for about half a mile and on just one side of Fountain.

Oh, and watch out for those potholes.


Graduation cycle chic at Caltech. New York cyclists envy our newfound relationship with the LAPD. The RAAM leaders hit Trinidad CO three days into the race, one-third of the way across the country. Instead of just fighting a new law, some Florida cyclists want to ban bike lanes all together. Two thousand riders will spend the next week riding the Rockies. $2.4 million settlement for cyclist killed after hitting a lane divider that shouldn’t have been used. After a cyclist is killed, local residents demand that the speed limit be cut in half — even though her death had nothing to do with cars or speed. Riding in style in Savannah. A mother questions whether bicycling is too dangerous for her kids. Dave Moulton looks at the bicycling, reiki practicing road-rage driver who intentionally struck four cyclists in San Francisco. Alberto Contador studies Lance and Pantani to see how it’s done, then rides out to conquer Alpe d’Huez in the Dauphine. While other cities get parking protected bike lanes, Copenhagen gets bike-parking protected bike lanes. After a Swedish cyclist is intentionally struck by a driver, the rider faces charges for riding in the roadway. A law-abiding Critical Mass comes to Moose Jaw. Dubai plans to empty the roads of inattentive and unsafe drivers.

Finally, a look at World Naked Bike Ride around the globe, including London, Ottawa, Toronto and Halifax.

This is why cyclists need to vote

Let’s go back in time a bit.

Back in the dark ages, when dinosaurs roamed the earth and I was still in high school, I edited the school newspaper.

One day, our staff photographer noticed a police officer approach a car stopped in front of the school and begin to search of the vehicle, without permission or probable cause. So he grabbed his camera, ran outside and started taking photos.

The officer, no doubt aware of the illegality of the search, threatened to arrest him and confiscate his film. So he put the camera way and slunk back to class as the officer continued his fruitless search.

But rabble-rouser that I was, even at such a tender age, I was damned if that would be the end of it.

The next day, I placed a phone call the state headquarters of the ACLU. And soon we were represented, pro bono, by a lawyer who leapt at the chance to protect our 1st Amendment rights.

The result was a written statement from the chief of police apologizing for the officers actions. He went on to add that even student journalists were legitimate members of the press and had every right to take photos of the officer’s actions; and further, that since it had taken place in plain view on a public street, anyone with a camera had a 1st Amendment right to do so.

In other words, we won.

Now fast forward a few decades.

A fellow blogger and friend crosses the street to take photos of a police officer conducting what was probably an illegal search of a cyclist, and finds himself handcuffed and eventually ticketed for a moving violation — even though he was on foot and crossing in the crosswalk, with the light.

It happened during Saturday’s C.R.A.N.K. MOB event, when the citizenry of Hollywood panicked upon being invaded by a horde of bicyclists, and the police responded in force.

Now, I’m not a fan of these rolling raves.

While I’m a whole-hearted supporter of the right to ride, even in large, semi-spontaneous groups, I believe we need to be considerate of other people — whether that means maintaining a reasonable level of sobriety, keeping the noise level down so residents can sleep, or allowing drivers to get where they are going without undue interference.

Because when you ride with no consideration for the rights of other users of the road — in other words, exactly the way too many drivers do — you become the problem, not the solution.

As Los Angeles Cyclist put it:

…Unfortunately, I was in the back half of the group, so by the time we got toward the Ralph’s which was our destination, someone who had arrived earlier had apparently decided not to pay for his items, and caused the police to be dispatched. (Apparently one of the ride organizers helped apprehend the thief. WELL DONE SIR.)

Lots of police were dispatched.

Who, by strategically blocking intersections directed the group out of West Hollywood and up toward actual Hollywood.

Then we headed East on Hollywood Blvd., which was pretty much a total fiasco.

Poorly corked/run intersections, irate motorists, cyclists not used to riding in groups, made for a BIG mess. I tried to time the intersections so I entered them on a green light, but with a group of close to 1,000 cyclists, some of the motorists were getting impatient, especially if they’d waited through the previous few lights and were trying to make a left turn.

So the police may have had good reason to break up the ride. Unfortunately, a few seem to have crossed the line, by breaking the law in order to enforce it.

LA Cyclist goes on to describe a young woman who was intentionally doored by an officer, in a highly questionable use of force. If a civilian hit a cyclist with his door in such a manner, he could be charged with a felony; yet an officer used exactly the same dangerous technique to apprehend a scofflaw for the heinous crime of failing to stop quickly enough after running a red light.

That same officer, evidently feeling a need to protect homeland security from the dangers of two-wheeled citizens, wanted to know if the cyclists patiently waiting to be ticketed were anarchists. No, seriously.

Meanwhile, Alex spent 20 minutes in handcuffs because a police officer claimed he crossed the intersection while the red hand was flashing — not because he was attempting to take photos of the officer while he searched a cyclist after a minor traffic stop, something that would be illegal if done to a motorist. This despite the fact that the courts have held that bloggers have the same 1st Amendment rights as any member of the mainstream press.

And the other cyclist was ticketed for an offense that both the city council and chief of police have agreed should not be enforced.

As Zach Behrens points out on LAist, the use of cuffs is at an officer’s discretion. Yet it can hardly be argued that any officer should feel threatened by a camera, or the person using it.

Or as Damien Newton put it:

Handcuffing someone for not having a bike license?  For crossing the street against a flashing red hand?  What country am I living in?

%d bloggers like this: