Tag Archive for bicycling

This WTF moment, courtesy of Santa Monica and the League of American Bicyclists

May 7, 2009 / / 11 comments

Don’t get me wrong.

I like riding in Santa Monica. It’s a genuine pleasure to ride in a city that has actual cycling infrastructure, let alone where bike routes actually connect with something and you can plot out a route to just about anywhere you want to go.

Coming from traffic-heavy Los Angeles, it’s a breath of fresh air. Literally.

Still, I was surprised when the League of American Bicyclists named SaMo a bicycle-friendly city. Even if it was just a bronze.

I know the state of cycling pretty well sucks in this country. But either they didn’t consult local riders before they made their award, or the bar is set so low we’ll have to be careful not to trip on it.

Because it takes more than just infrastructure and good intentions to truly be bicycle friendly. Even for a city of less than 90,000 people that offers 16 miles of bike lanes, 19 miles of bike routes and a 3 mile beachfront bikeway.

It takes a genuine commitment to work with cyclists to encourage riding. Not government officials who refuse to meet with them to work out a compromise that would allow Critical Mass to take place without a heavy-handed police crackdown, complete with bogus — and possibly illegal — tickets.

It takes a city where infrastructure doesn’t just exist, but was smartly planned to protect the safety of riders while preserving traffic flow. It also means a commitment to enforcing restrictions on that infrastructure — or to put it another way, keeping cars the hell out of the bike lane.

In fact, Santa Monica could balance their entire city budget by placing a couple of officers on northbound Ocean Avenue. Then just ticket the drivers who blithely cruise down the bike lane for nearly a full city block between Arizona and Wilshire. I usually see at least couple such idiots every time I ride through there — even though I’m the only one using it for its intended purpose.

And don’t get me started on the way the city allows movie crews to place cones blocking the bike lanes, for no other purpose than to keep cyclists from coming within three feet of their precious trucks.

Yeah, that’s worth risking a life for.

Then there’s the city’s crown jewel, which was mentioned prominently in their press release touting the LAB award — three miles of beach-front bikeway, part of the larger Marvin Braude Bike Path.

As the Times’ Steve Lopez pointed out recently, it’s nearly impossible to ride at times due to the sheer number of pedestrians, dogs, skaters and other assorted non-two-wheeled flotsam. A bikeway on which people are often surprised to encounter cyclists, despite the “Bikes Only” and “No Pedestrians” markings every few feet. And despite the presence of a parallel pedestrian walkway mere feet — or in some cases, inches — away.

Because just like with drivers on the street, if the city won’t enforce bikeway restrictions — let alone state laws that prohibit the blocking of any Class 1 bikeway — other users will take it over and claim it as their own.

Of course, it’s not just a problem in Santa Monica. L.A.’s segment of the bikeway along Venice Beach isn’t any better. And evidently, Long Beach — another recent bronze winner — has issues of its own.

Maybe the LAB thinks things like that are acceptable for a bike-friendly city. Or maybe they’re trying to encourage cities that have made a modest start to keep improving until bike-friendliness permeates the entire city culture.

Or maybe they just didn’t ask those of us who know those city streets best.

I’ll leave the last word to Gary Se7en, in a comment he made on LAist:

I live and work in Santa Monica, live car free and ride a bike every day. It’s not that bad here. It’s not that great either, although it beats most anywhere else in Los Angeles. Maybe SM should get a copper rating instead of bronze. Also bike routes should not count for anything. Lincoln Blvd. is a bike route, Lincoln is also one of the worst streets to ride a bike on in L.A. county.


LAist covers today’s press conference about AB 766, the Safe Streets Bill. The Orange Line Bike Path finally gets a much-needed makeover, while talk of sharrows surfaces yet again in L.A.; the LACBC asks you to beg our mayor to move forward. C.I.C.L.E. promotes Bike Week in Pasadena. Connecticut considers a bill that would set aside 1% of all state and federal transportation funds to improve bike and pedestrian access. A bike-hating deputy sheriff from hell assaults two cyclists in Ohio, and a bike riding cop from Florida explains why you should stop anyway. A writer in western Colorado asks why drivers can’t give cyclists as much space as they would a horse or cow. Finally, from across the pond, a new campaign says there’s safety in numbers, while the leader of the Conservatives in Parliament has his bike stolen. Again.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

L.A. Council District 5 — Paul Koretz

May 6, 2009 / / 3 comments

As I noted on here a few weeks ago, I was recently approached by representatives for both of the candidates in the race for L.A.’s 5th Council District. They each offered to have their respective candidates address bicycling and transportation issues here, so I sent each campaign a list of five questions. Former state Assembly Member and West Hollywood City Council Member Paul Koretz is the first to respond. I’ll repost this on the CD5/SD26 page above and keep it there through the election on May 19th, and will post David Vahedi’s responses as soon as I receive them.

Paul Koretz

pk-headshot-smallA bicyclist was killed by an intoxicated hit-and-run driver in Echo Park recently, the latest in a string of hit-and run incidents. What can be done on the city level to reduce the rate of both drunk driving and hit-and-runs? And what can be done to improve safety for bicyclists and pedestrians?

First, we need to educate people about drinking in moderation by promoting alcohol abuse awareness programs and making the public more conscious of the serious consequences of drinking and driving.  Second, I think one of the largest contributing factors to drunk driving in Los Angeles is the lack of an accessible and effective regional public transportation system. We simply do not have a system in place for people to safely travel between local bars and restaurants and their home. Expanding our existing public transportation system would be the first big step. I also believe that penalties for hit-and-run drivers need to be substantially increased and enforced. It’s a serious crime and the penalties need to be much stiffer for offenders.  I strongly believe that our current system lets drunk drivers off the hook too easily.

I have met with neighborhood groups throughout the district who are deeply concerned with the recent increases in alcohol-related accidents that have caused serious bodily harm and in some cases, unfortunately, death. We need to increase traffic police activity near major intersections and thoroughfares throughout the district to deter speeders and red light runners. Cross walk sting operations (near Robertson and Pico) have been able to temporarily increase awareness among morning and evening commuters. In addition, we should also increase traffic lights and reflectors near intersections to alert drivers at crossing areas. Finally,  I am also in favor of increasing penalties for violations of these regulations.

One step we could take immediately to help make our streets safer would be to support Assistant Majority Leader Paul Krekorian in helping pass AB 766, the Safe Streets Bill. This important legislation would address the problem of rising speed limits in our neighborhoods and empower give local cities and neighborhoods to regulate their own speed limits, while still being able to enforce them.  The Safe Streets Bill will equip local governments with the tools to keep the speeds traveled on local roads at a rational level and make the streets in our community safer for bicyclists, drivers and pedestrians alike.  

The Los Angeles City Council recently gave approval to the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights. Are you familiar with this document, and if so, do you support these rights as written? Are there any you disagree with, and why? And what would you consider the next steps to transform those rights from mere words into tangible action?  

I am well-versed with the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights and I support it.  It goes without saying that Cyclists should be entitled to the same protections under the law as everyone else. I believe the first step is to transform these rights into tangible action by increasing the role that cyclists play in urban and roadway planning. I strongly encourage input from the cycling community on how to improve our public transportation and specifically how we can increase access to and use of mass transit. We all need to work together to create conditions that will ensure safety for all parties – pedestrians, cyclists and mass transit passengers.  

There is often a high level of tension between cyclists and drivers in Los Angeles as they compete for limited road space, as illustrated by last year’s incident in Mandeville Canyon. What can the city do to help reduce that tension, and encourage both sides to safely and courteously share the road?  

It’s not easy to get motorists in Los Angeles, who are so dependent on their cars, to realize that bicyclists have the same rights as someone in a car. That being said, I think the driver in the Mandeville Canyon incident went far beyond extreme – deadly. I am pleased that Councilmember Rosendahl (who has endorsed my campaign) agreed to introduce the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights, which I whole-heartedly support and I think is a step in the right direction to addressing the tension.  

What role, if any, do you see bicycles playing in city transportation policy and improving traffic flow within the city?

When I was the Mayor of West Hollywood, I requested input from the bicycle community on how to implement bike lanes on part of Santa Monica Boulevard. I think Los Angeles needs to adopt a regional public transportation approach that not only addresses improving traffic flow, and mass transit, but also how we can improve options and the quality of life for bicyclists.

In general, we need to focus on the creation of an effective bicycle infrastructure. Los Angeles, with over 330 sunny days a year, should be the world leader in bicycle commuting. We need to start the work of building many more miles of safe bikeways and adequate secure parking for commuters. These two steps will be a good beginning in our efforts to alleviate congestion and improve traffic flow.

Are there any other issues you want to address, or any additional comments you’d like to make to the bicycling community?

I am very proud to say that I rode a bicycle all the way from San Francisco to Los Angeles as part of the AIDS Lifecycle. It was one of the most rewarding experiences because I got to see California from a unique perspective while supporting a great cause.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

AB 766 — An open letter to the California State Assembly

May 5, 2009 / / Comments Off on AB 766 — An open letter to the California State Assembly

As you may recall, I recently wrote about the need to pass the Safe Streets Bill AB 766.

As part of that, I encouraged everyone — and yes, that includes you — write a letter in support of the bill, and email it to SafeStreets@BikeWritersCollective.com for presentation at a committee hearing next week.

Here is my letter, which I have just emailed to the Bike Writers Collective — the group behind the recently passed Cyclists’ Bill of Rights. Feel free to copy any portion of this to use as the basis for your letter, or write your own in your own words.

But please, write something.

Dear Assembly Member,

The highest responsibility of state government is the protection of its citizens, as well as the countless neighborhoods that make up our state.

Sadly, California is failing in that duty.

Currently, state law allows local governments to use radar to control speed limits; however, in exchange for that privilege, they are required conduct a study of average traffic speeds every seven years. If most drivers exceed the speed limit, which most drivers in California do, they have no choice but to raise the speed limit — whether or not that’s a good idea, and regardless of the harm it may cause to the local community.

The result is that the lives of local residents are needlessly placed at risk, as pedestrians and bicyclists must contend with traffic moving at ever higher speeds, while collisions between vehicles are likely to be far more dangerous and destructive. At the same time, higher speeds encourage through-traffic, as opposed to local destination traffic, contributing to the declines suffered by business districts and residential neighborhoods along the way.

AB 766, the Safe Streets Bill, would rectify that situation by giving the local community a voice in deciding whether or not to raise the limits, without requiring that they give up a valuable enforcement tool in exchange.

I urge you to support this vital measure, and cast your vote to return control of our streets to the people who know them best, and will be most impacted by any increase in speed limits — and allow the people of this state to protect their own lives and communities.

Sincerely,

Ted Rogers, BikingInLA.com

Enci Box discusses her upcoming trip in support of AB 766 in her own compelling way, while Damien Newton notes a wave of support for the legislation. And on a related subject, L.A. Council President Eric Garcetti wants to know how you want to spend the city’s stimulus funds. Can you say, bicycling infrastructure? Sure you can.

 

A great video showing British MPs learning about cycling from the Dutch, courtesy of my favorite Welsh slow-biking blogger — now if we could only get the Metro board to take the same tour. Also from across the pond, proof that bad cycling signage isn’t just an American problem. Meanwhile, LAist discusses what L.A. could learn from Tokyo Bike Culture, as does the Time’s Steve Lopez. Yes, that Tokyo. Bicycle Fixation observes the increase in fixie-riding bike commuters. Central Illinois cyclists prepare to participate in an international cycling memorial ride later this month. And finally, The Denver Post says cyclists need to know the rules of the road, too; don’t miss the comments, which capture the full range of the cyclists vs. drivers conflict — and evidently, someone out there takes safety tips from yours truly.  Glad I could help.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

AB 766 — Slowing our streets for everyone’s safety

May 3, 2009 / / 3 comments

How many people have to die because of a bad law?

As cyclists, we often have no choice but to share the road with drivers. It’s risky enough on streets where there’s just a small disparity in speed — where drivers pass by at 30 mph, for instance, while you ride along at your own speed, whether that’s 12 mph or 20 mph.

But that risk increases dramatically as speeds rise, and the disparity between your speed and that of the cars rushing up from behind grows. Drivers have less time to see you, and less time to react.

And you have a lot less time to get the hell out of their way if anything goes wrong.

The potential for serious injury goes up, as well, with every mile per hour in speed differential. Because the faster a vehicle is traveling, the more damage it can do if it hits anything. Or anyone.

Which brings us to California AB 766.

You see, current California law allows the police to use radar to enforce speed limits on the streets. While that might seem like a problem if you’re behind the wheel, trying to push the speed limit by 5 or 10 mph to get to your destination a few seconds faster, it’s actually a good thing — enforcing the speed limits makes the roads safer for everyone.

The problem is the Faustian bargain that cities have had to accept in order to use that radar.

One of the conditions the state requires in order to use radar guns is that cities have to conduct a study every seven years to evaluate speeds and traffic conditions.

If that study shows that most drivers go over the speed limit on a given roadway — which most drivers do — they can be forced to raise the speed limit, whether or not that’s a good idea. And regardless of what effect that might have on local neighborhoods, as previously placid surface streets are slowly turned into speedways.

Or how many lives may be shattered along the way.

Sponsored by Assistant Majority Leader Paul Krekorian, AB 766, also known as the Safe Streets Bill, would give cities more power to control their own speed limits, while still being able to enforce them.

It’s not a big change. But it’s one that could do wonders to preserve our neighborhoods, and the lives of people just like you.

And me.

Bike Safety Advocates Stephen and Enci Box, along with other members of the Bike Writers Collective — the group behind the recently passed Cyclists’ Bill of Rights — are working to help pass this important bill.

As part of that, they’re asking everyone to write letters in support of it, which they will deliver to the Assembly in person at an upcoming hearing in Sacramento. Fellow blogger Ron Kaye, former editor of the Los Angeles Daily News, has already written his — as well as providing a link to a fact sheet about the bill — and I’ll be writing one in the next few days myself.

And I hope you will, too.

You can email your letter to SafeStreets@BikeWritersCollective.com. And I’m sure Ron wouldn’t mind if you wanted to use his as an example. Or if you asked all your friends to write one, as well.

Because your safety, and mine, could depend on it.

You can read more about this bill, and the Box’s upcoming lobbying trip in support of it, at Stephen Box’s blog, as well as at the blog Brayj Against the Machine — both of which you really should be reading, if you don’t already. And learn more about the problem at City Watch.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , ,

Officer Krupke, you’ve done it again — Pedal power to the people

May 1, 2009 / / 7 comments

I don’t think they knew what hit them.

When Council President Eric Garcetti opened today’s meeting, L.A.’s city council members probably expected to speak to a mostly empty room at yet another typically dull city council meeting. What they got was something entirely different.

1-council-meeting-smallInstead of empty chairs, they faced a room full of angry bicyclists. Most of whom demanded the right to speak in protest of last week’s Hummer incident, as well as dangerous and illegal police tactics and general lack of support from the LAPD.

Once the floor was opened for comments, a near continuous stream of riders approached the microphone — including Andres, who was injured by the Hummer, and Krista, who spoke of having her bike ripped from her hands as the driver fled the scene. Among the others commenting were Alex Thompson, who helped lead the response to this incident, along with Enci and Stephen Box, and the Ridazz’ Roadblock and Chicken Leather.

I’d like to tell you exactly who commented and what they said. But to be honest, I kind of got wrapped up in the moment and forgot to take notes.

Or more precisely, I preferred to participate, rather than observe.

Overall, though, many riders pointed out the dangers that they face on a daily basis from angry and aggressive motorists, and how that problem is only exacerbated by the anti-bike bias demonstrated by some officers. Not to mention the poor conditions of the roadways and a general lack of infrastructure that contributes to confrontations by forcing cyclists into the traffic.

And both Alex and Stephen reminded the council of their repeated failures to follow through on previous bike-related motions and programs that had passed the council, only to die somewhere in city’s vast bureaucracy.

When I spoke, I briefly mentioned my own experience with a road-raging driver, and how the failure to ticket or charge the

The Cyclists' Bill of Rights

The Cyclists' Bill of Rights

 driver gave her permission to do it again to someone else. And how the failure to cite the Good Doctor the first time he ran cyclists off the road — at least, the first time we know of — only encouraged him to do it again, as evidenced by his great surprise when the police actually arrested him following last year’s Mandeville Canyon incident.

Then I added that the failure to charge the Hummer driver was tacit permission from the LAPD to go out and do it again, thus further endangering cyclists.

I concluded by pointing out that the recently passed Massachusetts Bike Safety Bill requires all new police officers to receive training in bike laws and safety while at the academy, and asked why Los Angeles couldn’t establish a program like that. And reminded the council members that the riders gathered behind me were voters, as well as a bicyclists.

Evidently, we were heard.

Before the meeting, departing District 5 city council member, and current candidate for city attorney, Jack Weiss met us on the steps of city hall to say that as a weekend cyclist himself — because he considers it too dangerous to ride on weekdays — he fully supports cyclists.

Afterwards, Bill Rosendahl noted that Mandeville Canyon is in his district, and that he had responded by introducing the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights. And that while we had been speaking, he, Janice Hahn, Ed Reyes and Tom LaBonge had signed the following motion:

Numerous incidents have been reported relative to bicycle and vehicle collisions and aggressive motorists attitudes to law-abiding people riding bicycles. Complaints have also been raised regarding the treatment of bicyclists by the Los Angeles Police Department. It is critical that the City respond to these situations and respond appropriately. 

I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council direct the Los Angeles Police Department to report on recent bicycle incidents and conflicts between bicyclists and motorists, as well as efforts to increase police officer training related to bicycling activities and applicable regulations and laws.

Reyes, Hahn, Wendy Greuel, and Tony Cardenas also rose to speak in support of cyclists, while Garcetti thanked us for coming and promised that action will be taken. And LaBonge followed us outside to address the gathered cyclists and express his support.

Tom LaBonge addressing cyclists after the council meeting

Tom LaBonge addressing cyclists after the council meeting

 

Enci and Stephen Box have both posted recaps of the meetings — including Enci’s powerful comments. And if you were there and remember what you said, feel free to add it to the comment section below.

Category: General / Tags: , , , ,

The very definition of four-wheeled irony

April 30, 2009 / / Comments Off on The very definition of four-wheeled irony

Just a quick aside before getting back to this week’s topic.

It didn’t take long on today’s ride to realize it was going to be one of those days, when I had to be extra careful because a lot of the drivers weren’t. Like the one who turned his post-red light left into a long delayed U-turn, nearly t-boning me in the process.

But the winner had to be the woman who was waiting impatiently as I approached a four-way stop at the bottom of a steep hill.

The driver ahead of her might have been aware that a lot of riders blow through that stop sign; or maybe he was just being cautious and waiting to see if I was going to stop. Either way, she was having none of it as she laid on her horn and yelled out “He has to stop, moron!”

He continued waiting until I came to a full stop, then proceeded through the intersection as I nodded to thank him.

And then she ran the stop sign.

Category: General / Tags: , , ,

Officer Krupke, you’ve done it again — Cyclists plan to Storm the Bastille

April 30, 2009 / / 3 comments

Man the barricades.

Last week saw a vehicular assault on a group of cyclists, which was followed by threats of gun and gang violence — not to mention the crushing of several bikes as the driver attempted to flee the scene in his plate-less two-ton Hummer.

Then, in an action many cyclists recognize as typical of the LAPD, the driver was allowed to leave the scene without so much as a warning — despite being stopped by the police with a bicycle still lodged beneath his vehicle. And to top it off, the officer in charge not only said that he would have done the same thing, but implied that he might have used a gun himself.

Clearly, whatever may have lead up to this event, cyclists will never be safe on the streets of Los Angeles until we have the full support and protection of the LAPD that should be the right of every citizen of this city — and something that is promised by the 1st, 3rd and 4th clauses of the recently adopted Cyclists’ Bill of Rights:

1) Cyclists have the right to travel safely and free of fear.

3) Cyclists have the right to the full support of educated law enforcement.

4) Cyclists have the right to the full support of our judicial system and the right to expect that those who endanger, injure or kill cyclists be dealt with to the full extent of the law.

This past Tuesday, a group of cyclists met with Los Angeles Police Commission and the police Inspector General to file a protest.

Now riders are being called on to attend this Friday’s City Council meeting at the Van Nuys City Hall to express our dissatisfaction and demand action from the city government. If you can’t attend in person, contact your city council person now.

I’ll leave it to Dr. Alex to explain why immediate action is necessary.

Because we all have the right to be safe on our streets, whether we use two wheels or four.


Gary rides bikes, and now tweets, too. Lance starts his comeback at New Mexico’s Tour of the Gila. Coconut Grove cyclists take a page from the Dutch. The good news is, California no longer leads the nation in cyclists killed; the bad news is, we’re number two. Our rash of hit-and-runs spreads to neighboring Arizona, while a Utah driver who intentionally drove into a group of cyclists is sentenced to just 30 days in jail. An Iowa cyclist is injured after being struck with a full can of beer thrown from a passing car. Finally, a judge in Australia blames a rider’s accident on not having a headlight — even though he was hit from behind, despite his rear flasher.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , , ,

Officer Krupke, you’ve done it again — LAPD’s anti-bike bias

April 28, 2009 / / One comment

Earlier this month, Dr. Alex left a comment on something I’d written. The last line in particular has stuck with me for the last few weeks:

…I feel more and more that the leading edge of bike activism is in law enforcement issues, not urban planning

You see, in the 10 months since I started this blog, I’ve become more and more focused on the politics of cycling — the need to elect candidates who actually support bicycling and will work to change the laws to help encourage riding, and keep cyclists safe and alive.

But Alex has a damn good point, especially in light of the LAPD’s apparent failure to enforce the laws prohibiting vehicular assault this past weekend — let alone protect riders from threats of gun and gang violence.

Unfortunately, it’s nothing new.

My own experience with police bias dates back to a road rage incident I’ve mentioned before, when a driver intentionally knocked me off my bike while I was stopped at a stop sign.

Once the police finally got there, the driver insisted that she never hit me or my bike, and in fact, had no idea why I was upset or why I was blaming her. According to her version, she was just minding her own business, driving patiently behind me, when I blew through the stop sign without even slowing down, and simply fell over when making a right turn.

The officer in charge listened to her, then came over to me, and — without bothering to get my version of the events, either from me or the officer I’d given my statement to — said he believed her, “because none of you bike riders ever obey stops signs.”

I realized then that nothing I said was going to influence how he wrote his report.

Of course, I tried.

I pointed out the injuries on my left side, to show that I had fallen to my left. Which meant her version would make me the first cyclist in history to fall to the left while making a fast right turn. But his blank stare confirmed my suspicions that beginning physics isn’t a required course at the police academy these days.

Then I pointed to the long arc of deep gashes on my right calf, and showed how they lined up perfectly with the teeth on my large cog. And explained how that proved my foot was planted firmly on the ground when her car struck me, since my leg wouldn’t have hit it like that if I’d been clipped in.

Finally, I pointed out that the damage to my bike, while minor, was consistent with my version of the events, and could not have occurred the way she described it. Yet when I got a copy of the accident report, he’d written that there was no damage to my bike.

And that’s exactly what her insurance company cited as justification for denying my claim.

In the end, she left without even a warning, while I was threatened with arrest for filing a false police report. And it was then that I realized that cyclists can’t count on the LAPD for protection or support.

And nothing that has occurred in the years since to change that opinion.

Of course, not all officers are like that. And as Zach Behrens pointed out on LAist, there are two sides any story.

But it’s up to the police to protect the rights and safety of all citizens, without bias. Not protect the right of those on four wheels to attack and intimidate those of us on two.


L.A.’s Channel 2 covers last weekend’s Ghost Bike installation. An Ohio paper offers nine good tips for safe riding. Stephen Box reports on the “not my job” jurisdictional failure of the Orange Line Bike Path. The Weekly profiles Flying Pigeon’s Brayj-Ali brothers among their LA People 2009. Colorado’s common-sense bike safety bill awaits the governor’s signature, while Wisconsin passes an anti-dooring bill. Great Briton considers a Pounds for Pedals plan to encourage people to trade in their old bikes. Finally, a cyclist injured in a Santa Rosa collision is suspected of BRWI (that’s bike riding while intoxicated).

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , ,

Ghost bike for Echo Park cycling fatality; Police-blessed vehicular assault Downtown

April 24, 2009 / / 2 comments

Stephen Box managed to get the information I couldn’t find anywhere else.

Earlier in the week, I’d written about the cyclist killed by an intoxicated hit-and-run driver in Echo Park early Sunday. Despite my best efforts, I wasn’t able to learn any more about the victim than had been included in the initial reports; Box reports that he was a day laborer from Sonora, Mexico, who used his bicycle as his primary means of transportation.

Just one of the countless nameless, faceless workers we Angelenos pass every day without a second thought.

Yet he died as one of us. 

And he is being memorialized this evening where he was killed on Glendale Blvd. As Box put it:

Let’s work together to make sure this is the last Ghost Bike placed in our community.

Meanwhile, the local cyber wires are buzzing with the news that a cyclist was injured late last night when he was struck by a driver in Hummer with no license plates — apparently intentionally. The occupants of the vehicle then threatened the other riders with guns and gang violence, and ran over several of their bikes when they tried to block the vehicle until police arrived.

But the real injustice came when the lead officer let the driver go, and told the cyclists that he would have done the same thing the driver did — and suggested that he might have used a gun, as well.

So who exactly is he trying to “protect and serve”?

As a number of people have commented on the Midnight Ridazz forum, some of the other officers on the scene were far more sympathetic. But this represents an anti-cyclist bias that seems far too common in the L.A.P.D. — one that I’ve experienced myself, when I was threatened with arrest after being the victim of a road rage incident a few years back.

The difference is, now there really is a cycling community in Los Angeles, and protests are already being planned for next week. And in fact, may be occurring right now, as there were plans to extend the Ghost Bike ride into a protest at Parker Center.

And less than a week after Jesus Castillo was killed in Echo Park, another cyclist was the victim of yet another hit-and-run in Orange County today.

Some run away.

And some just get away with it.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , , ,

Is an accident just an accident?

April 23, 2009 / / 2 comments

There’s an interesting debate going on over at Streetsblog.

As I noted the other day, Damien Newton has written about a new ghost bike at Fountain and La Brea — a memorial to two women who died when one of the cars involved in a typical traffic accident careened into the women as they stepped off the curb, killing them both.

Just another tragic accident.

After all, no one intentionally did anything to endanger these women. They were just in the wrong place, at the wrong time, when things when out of control with unintended consequences. And yet, they’re still dead.

As Damien put it:

Of course, neither driver was charged in the crash because of a little-known, but oft-cited, part of the vehicle code that clearly states, “Unless a driver is drunk, runs away from the crash or does something else horrific but telegenic action; said driver can kill as many pedestrians as he or she desires.”  I guess causing a chain reaction of crashes that kills two elderly women, and injured a third pedestrian, wasn’t quite exciting enough.

A few people took exception to that. David Galvin, for instance:

Right. Because the drivers of both of these vehicles really desired to kill two people that day. How do you know that? Because they were driving cars. Murderous monsters. Do drivers of the blue line “desire” to kill someone when that happens?… The incident mentioned in the post was tragic. And yes it resulted from either wrecklessness OR a momentary lapse in judgement OR a mistake. And yes, it cost the lives of two people. But there IS such a thing as an accident.

Which got me wondering, is there really such a thing as an accident? Or to put it another way, is it possible to have a collision without at least one of the drivers — or yes, cyclists or pedestrians — violating the law in some way?

I’m not sure it is.

Invariably, one or more of the people involved is speeding, tailgating, or fails to yield the right-of-way. Or simply isn’t paying enough attention.

I’ve been wracking my brain — or what’s left of it, anyway — and can only come up with two ways an accident could occur with no one being at fault.

The first is when someone or something, such as an animal or a child, darts out into the roadway without warning, forcing drivers to react; of course, this requires the inability to understand the consequences of their actions, otherwise they would be at fault. The other is when a mechanical, road or weather condition eliminates the ability to control the vehicle, such as a steering or brake failure, or hitting a patch of glare ice (though the latter seldom happens here in L.A.).

Of course, it’s not always the vehicles involved that are responsible. Some drivers — like the jackasses who drive city streets at 80 mph, weaving in and out of traffic — cause far more collisions than they seem to have themselves.

And yes, that goes for some cyclists, as well.

But we live in a society that has accepted collisions as a natural, and seemingly inevitable, consequence of mobility. We call them accidents, implying that no one is really at fault. We don’t have enough police officers to fully investigate them or effectively enforce the laws. We have an overburdened court system that discourages filing charges in anything but the most egregious cases. And we have an insurance system that ensures that drivers seldom suffer the financial consequences, either.

And so people die, and it’s no one’s fault.

Damien wrote a great response to the comments — one I highly recommend reading. But this seems to sum it up:

The same logic applies here. People should be paying more attention to the road when approaching a crosswalk, not having momentary lapses. If there’s some external reason (hepped up on caffeine, distraught that his girlfriend dumped him, tired from a day of exams) they shouldn’t be driving in the first place. Cars are deadly when not utilized safely and we should treat them as such and the people driving them should be responsible for their actions.

If a car hits another car, the occupants have over a ton of steel to protect them, along with assorted seat belts, air bags and head restraints. Cyclists and pedestrians, on the other hand, have little or nothing to protect them. And the consequences of someone’s inattention, inability to control their vehicle, or unwillingness to obey the law can be quite different.

Or as another blogger I’ve been reading lately recently wrote:

…when a driver screws up and hits a cyclist, the cyclist gets injured or dies, but when a cyclist screws up and hits a car, the cyclist gets injured or dies.

Update: A man was struck by an out-of-control car today on Lincoln Blvd. in Playa del Rey, apparently while seated on a sidewalk bus bench.

But hey, it was just an accident.

 

Flying Pigeon gets a visit from a Pulitzer Prize winning writer. Alex tells the LACBC to stop twitter stalking his mom. The U.S. Secretary of Transportation supports cycling, so why can’t our own mayor? Texas cyclists put on suits and lobby their legislators. Seattle riders get more infrastructure. A mountain biker dies falling from an unofficial bike trail, and a UK driver fatally runs down a cyclist for damaging his mirror.

Category: General / Tags: , , , , ,
« Older Entries   Recent Entries »
Wordpress Theme by ThemeZee