On the trail of 'ghost bikes,' families and friends of cyclists killed on the streets of New York rally for more police action »
There’s an understanding for a driver who is unaware of his surroundings and people around him. But the cyclist who is rapping on a person’s vehicle can be charged with criminal mischief. The difference is that a cyclist knows he’s touching a car and a driver doesn’t know he’s hitting or running over a cyclist. And it’s not just the police. It’s judges who have that perspective. And that affects what charges district attorneys brings.
Sort of how we shrug off the thousands of collaterally dead civilians in the various wars we’ve initiated lately, while vilifying dissidents at home and abroad who pose no violent threat to anyone. It’s not a good look.
There’s probably a good chunk of automobile killings that are just as intentional as the cyclist harmlessly rapping on the metallic shell of an automobile, but it’s hard to sort them out because it’s so easy to carelessly kill with an automobile. That’s not a good look, either.
(Source: jthompsonphoto)
The Scaly Scales of Justice »
Sure, cyclists should ride intelligently, but having respect for the power of a car is the driver’s job. If they lack that respect then the car should be taken from them.
Being only as interested in the taxonomy of American cycling subcultures as I am in baseball statistics, I have never been a Bike Snob reader. (And sorry, mom in law, I haven’t read that book you gave me.) But as Brooklyn Spoke pointed out, this is a righteous post.
The “power” that Snob is talking about is at the crux of everything that happens on our streets, from the subculture of masochistic cycling to the grateful nod that pedestrians give to motorists for being allowed to enjoy their lawful right of way.
In our society’s submission to this power, we’ve even corrupted the principle of responsibility such that it is far more often critically applied to pedestrian and cyclist victims than the people controlling the powerful vehicles that killed them. In the not-so-old days this social norm meant the very opposite: an obligation of those with power to use it with honor, respect, and care.
But anti-collective, anti-social, mechanized America has almost privatized responsibility out of existence. That noble ideal was rebranded as “self-responsibility”, an obligation not to be maimed or killed (so that no one else has to endure the unpleasantness). But we already have a lower, truer apprecation of that in our bones: it’s called survival. Survival is what’s left, when laws and social conventions are brushed aside.
Is this how we want to live?
via n8han, whose posts are always insightful and well phrased. very often i find myself reblogging him because i agree with his analysis and he sums up nicely my thoughts on the matter. i reblog him often.
The rhetoric around the bike has reached untenable heights. Not only is it completely unproductive, but it works to make both motorists and bicyclists unsafe by stoking anger and fear. By positioning it as a war between two clear sides, we reduce our ability to compromise, to work together. Spittle flies from both sides of the debate, as cyclists rush to label car drivers as gas-guzzling, suburban, earth-pigs and motorists respond by calling cyclists pretentious, militant, holier-than-thous (albeit with great calf muscles). Just reading the comments on blog posts and newspaper articles on the subject is enough to turn my hair white.
How did we get to this point? But, more importantly, how do we get away from it?
Over the years I have become pretty comfortable and confident riding amongst the four-wheeled death boxes, but I don’t think most drivers are comfortable with bicycles in the road, judging by how wide a berth they give me. I want them to give me a safe margin, but not so much that they endanger their lives and the lives inside the other four-wheeled death boxes in the oncoming lane. I try to be gracious toward the clueless, but slip now and again, especially with drivers who block a crosswalk, or don’t bother to look BOTH ways at an intersection (invariably they are only looking in one direction, and it isn’t mine). I always assume someone will do the wrong thing, and I prepare accordingly. Most often I assumed correctly, but am pleasantly surprised when proved wrong.”
— John Burnham, bike commuter (via bikecommuters.com)
Any collision, just about 100 per cent of collisions, are preventable, either on the part of the driver or the pedestrian. If either one of those took some extra care, regardless of who has the right-of-way, a collision can be avoided.”
—
Edmonton police Sergeant Dave Thompson, in response to November 11, 2010, traffic fatality in Alberta, Canada.
The Edmonton Bicycle Commuters’ Society has placed a ghost bike at the corner of 137th Avenue at 131st Street, in memory of 29-year-old cyclist Jeremy Half.
Last week more than 80 people jammed into the Orange County Wheelmen’s monthly meeting. Most were cyclists. But many were not. And what was especially encouraging – and appreciated – was that each person took time for what promised to be a pretty somber evening.
The title of my topic? “Why cyclists are killing one another, and how we can stop.”
Considering anyone at all showed up speaks not only to the commitment to safety, it speaks to the dire situation.
…
A lot more cyclists need to clean up their act before we can really focus on non-cyclists.
They need to stop breaking traffic laws, ride safely and ride with courtesy. It’s the least each and every cycling organization in Orange County – mountain and road, official and unofficial – can do to help reduce the number of deaths.
