Monday, November 9, 2009

The Times They Are a Changin

From the LA Times, November 2, 2009.


"A physician (Dr Christopher Thompson, ed.) accused of deliberately injuring two cyclists by slamming on his car’s brakes on a narrow Brentwood road last year was convicted Monday of assault with a deadly weapon, mayhem and other serious criminal charges....

"Prosecutors alleged that on July 4, 2008, Thompson stopped his car after passing the two cyclists and shouting at them to ride single-file. One cyclist ran face-first into the rear windshield of the doctor’s red Infiniti, breaking his front teeth and nose, and leaving his face scarred. The other was sent hurtling to the sidewalk and suffered a separated shoulder.

"A police officer testified that Thompson told him soon after the accident that the cyclists had cursed at him and flipped him off, so he slammed on his brakes “to teach them a lesson.”"

------

Fact: The cyclists were travelling at 30 mph on a narrow winding, wooded road before the collision.

This is fast for a narrow winding road, and should not have caused most motorists much inconvenience.

Fact: Dr. Thompson had been harassing the cyclists by honking, revving his engine and driving dangerously close for some time before passing and shouting at them.

We have to ask here: Why was he so angry at these cyclists?

--------

There is never a good excuse for violence. Today is November 9th, the 20th anniversary of the collapse of the Berlin Wall. Imagine what we'd have said if the East German border troops had started shooting people when the Wall was so provocatively breached on that day in 1989 and thousands flooded through? Thankfully those German soldiers responded sensibly and nobody was hurt. Let's hope the salutory lesson of Dr Thompson helps persuade American motorists to take a leaf out of their book.

Like Eastern Europe in the late Eighties, this is a time of social change in America. Cyclists are coming back onto the roads in rapidly increasing numbers, for recreational purposes and for transport purposes. The simple fact is road use is changing. Maybe Dr Thompson would have benefited from remembering a popular prayer:

God grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
And wisdom to know the difference.

Did Dr Thompson think the cyclists were misusing the road? Even if he wanted to change their behaviour, it is seldom possible to do this in the on-road setting. But let's look at what cyclists can do to make it easier for motorists. After all, traffic flow makes good sense, and any vehicles moving above or below the speed of the flow cause disruption.

Cyclists generally cannot travel above 20 mph on a flat road, 10 mph on an uphill, but can often go faster than a car on a winding descent. If cyclists could go faster on the flat and uphill, my bet is they would. These cyclists were taveling at 30 mph, probably the safe speed limit on the winding descent where the incident took place. Overall, speed modification is not an option available to cyclists.

Asking cyclists to ride in single file makes a perceptual difference, but in effect it doesn't make a big difference to the ease with which a car can pass. Passing a single-file cyclist puts most cars into the oncoming lane. If the cyclists are single or double file, the motorist still must go into the oncoming lane. Insisting that cyclists ride single-file seems like an unnecessary demand, but it is an area where cyclists are able to make a conciliatory gesture.

It makes sense for cyclists to ride in very small groups, up to six riders. This makes it easy for a car to pass easily and safely. Even if a large group of 100 cyclists is arranged into small packs of six, spaced 20 yards apart, by making small leapfrog passes, rather than being forced into the oncoming lane for an extended period the road is made safer for passing car drivers and cyclists alike.

There are times when I have pulled over to let a car pass. That seems reasonable to me in some circumstances.

There are other times when I have deliberately blocked a car from passing. For example when I am about to commence a steep winding descent on which I know my speed will be faster than a car.

In my experience cyclists do not set out to aggravate motorists (except for the Critical Mass rides, but those rides comprise an incredibly small fraction of all cycling trips and for this discussion are treated as a separate subject). The intention is generally to share the road in a safe and harmonious way.

One other thing: cyclists should use strong head and tail lights, reflectors, and wear clothes that help make them visible.

The other obvious question is: what can motorists do to increase safety on the roads? It seems to me that motorists have more options.

First, they could drive a little slower around cyclists.

Second, they could be more patient, and accept that with cyclists on the road their trip might take between 30 seconds and 5 minutes longer. Those two modifications alone would help foster feelings of harmony, as well as increasing safety.

The self-righteous attitude of angry motorists who think Dr Thompson had a leg to stand on - legally or morally - doesn't help. And those that know him and condone or excuse his actions, because in other ways he was an upstanding member of their community, are misguided. The violent action of Dr Thompson as an enraged motorist brought shame on his community, his friends and his family. Maybe the court decision will help them to realize this.

The question is begging: What would the same community have said if the cyclist he seriously injured had been the 18 year-old son or daughter of another member of that community?

What Thompson did was a criminal act. In all likelihood, he will need anger-management therapy whether he goes to prison or not. We do not know how many other cyclists he harassed and bullied with his car, but it is safe to assume that each one was traumatized to some extent.

Some motorists behave as though they own the roads. One hundred years ago, some cyclists made the same mistake when the automobile was the minority vehicle. History has proved that both parties are wrong in such assumptions. If the managing authorities cannot arrive at an effective solution, we all need to modify our behaviour as we can to foster a safer and more harmonious relationship between cyclists and car drivers.

No comments:

Post a Comment