www.twofivefix.blogspot.com

I read this following article and was so furious. Why is it so many motorist hate cyclist so much?...and now to physically injure a group of people. Ignorance? Bad run-ins with non-cyclist who happen to ride bikes? I was driving to the grocery store the other night when a man was riding his bike at night and on the wrong side of the road...it angered me so much because its people like that, that give the rest of cycling a bad image. There are rules of the road; this is not 'Nam! As for the people in the article, my heart goes out to them. They were doing the right thing and senselessly attacked.

From Sydney Morning Herald
May 8, 2008
About 50 cyclists - including Australian racer Kate Nichols, who was injured in a 2005 German road racing crash in which a teammate was killed - have been involved in a hit-and-run crash in Sydney this morning.

The resulting smash forced a semitrailer to lock up, jackknife and screech to a halt behind the cyclists while cars had to swerve to avoid them.

Also involved in the crash, at 6.35am on Southern Cross Drive, south of the corner of Dacey Avenue in Mascot, were former Olympians Ben Kersten, Kate's father Kevin Nichols, Graeme Brown, Michelle Ferris and Matthew White.

Witnesses to the crash have told smh.com.au the group of up to 60 professional cyclists were riding south on Southern Cross Drive, just south of Dacey Avenue, Mascot about 6.30am when a driver, agitated with being held up, accelerated in front of the pack and then slammed on his brakes, giving the riders no time to stop.

Olympic preparations derailed

Kersten, speaking from a chiropractor's surgery where he was having his injuries assessed, said he feared his preparation for the Beijing Olympics could be derailed by the incident.

"I did hurt myself, I'm not broken or anything, but I am going to need a few days' recovery," he said.

"I'm having trouble bending my arm, my hip's all flared up. I rolled my ankle so it's not something you just walk straight through, but a lot of other people looked a lot worse than me. It's just a disgrace, an absolute disgrace.

"I have an Olympic trial in two-and-a half weeks for the last remaining spot [on the team] so it's not very good timing at all.

"I've got to get a new bike now, I've got to worry about my injuries, I'm supposed to be at training now but I'm at the chiropractor. Every day counts. This is not what you need."

Kersten said motorists needed to learn to share the road with cyclists.

"This is our training ground. We can't ride round and round a football stadium at 60kmh. The law states we are allowed on the road. A brutal death match on the road is not going to solve anything," he said.

"We're so lucky somebody isn't dead, we were pushing 60kmh, sprawled all over the road with trucks going past. I really don't know how someone isn't dead, that's all I can say."

Kersten said any person found guilty of driving offences related to the crash should have to pay compensation to the riders whose equipment was damaged.

"My bike suffered a fair bit of damage, it's carbon and it's got a crack in it and the wheels are written off," he said.

"It's probably about $12,000 worth [of damage] but I am lucky enough to be sponsored by a [cycling manufacturer], so they will be able to do something, but there are 50 other bikes in the bunch that are not sponsored.

"I definitely think [the driver] should [pay compensation]. I think there was probably close to $50,000 worth of bike damage done.

"But I just want to see him go to jail, I don't give a hoot about the bikes because I don't think someone of that calibre is going to fork out one cent. I would rather see him go to jail."

Group called the Coluzzi Ride

One of the riders said the cycling group called itself the Coluzzi Ride after the Darlinghurst cafe it regularly set out from and was made up of "serious, A-grade riders and pros".

"A lot of Olympians and professionals when they are in town join the ride, most of them are just higher level amateurs, you have to be pretty fast to keep up," said rider Nick Cooper, 27.

One of the group said the motorist was "worrying" the rear of the pack, then overtook, pulled in front and slammed on his brakes, giving the riders no time to stop.

Slammed into each other

"Everyone's slammed into each other ... there were broken bikes - wheels busted and wheels snapped - and people lying on the road."

Mr Cooper said: "Three female cyclists took the brunt of the accident, careering into the back of the braking vehicle, several of them being thrown into the air landing on the boot and roof of the car.

"Most riders were left with cuts and bruises and at least some damage to bikes, shoes and helmets, including some bikes sustaining thousands of dollars of damage.

"This whole incident really exemplified the escalating road rage towards cyclists happening on Sydney's roads.

"Road rage seems to occur with or without provocation, and regardless of whether cyclists are riding in a law abiding way, or slowing down traffic.

Motorists jeered

"A perfect example of the enmity were the jeers and taunts of several drivers - more than three separate drivers that I noticed - making their way past the aftermath of the accident, despite the fact that a police car and two ambulances were on the scene treating seriously injured people.

"[A] policemen informed us that the back of the group was nearly cleaned up by a semitrailer locking the brakes to avoid the suddenly halting group, with its trailer jackknifing and sliding towards the group before being skilfully brought under control by the driver, narrowly avoiding potential fatalities," Mr Cooper said.

He said he overheard one rider telling a policewoman that his bicycle, which had sustained major damage to its front wheel, was worth $9000.

Michelle Ferris, who was at the front of the pack, described the collision.

"We we're all in the left hand lane and this Ford Falcon came from the middle lane and swerved into the front of the bunch and braked suddenly," she said.

"We were doing about 40kmh, there was no way for me to go and I went straight into the back of his car and other riders went into me.

"My chin [hit] the back window and my bike was totalled."

Police - including an off-duty officer who witnessed the crash - quickly closed the lane down while they investigated the incident.

Driver known to police

It is understood they know who the driver of the car is, and are attempting to contact him now.

It is expected he will be charged, including with failing to stop at the scene of an accident and negligent or dangerous driving.

There was no doubt the driver of the dark blue Ford Falcon - described by other witnesses as in his 30s with a female passenger - had done it deliberately, she said.

Everyone was particularly worried about Kate Nichols, given her involvement in the 2005 road crash in Germany in which national team member Amy Gillett was killed, Ferris said.

"We were all very worried about her. When I saw her she was as white as a ghost still sitting on the ground."

Nichols's father Kevin, who was also involved in the crash, said his daughter had only just begun riding again after a lengthy lay-off.

"She's pretty shaken, it's a pretty shaking incident," he said.

"She just started [riding again] last week, she had a long break and had just started out again. She hadn't ridden with this group for months.

"She had had a bit of tiredness, issues being sorted out, she had started work and was taking it easy. She was sick last year, she had a virus."

Mr Nichols said he was not sure if the crash, so soon after the horrific injuries she suffered in Germany in 2005, would prompt his daughter to give the sport away completely.

"Who knows?" he said. "You take each day as it comes with this sort of thing."

His daughter was not in contention for the Australian Olympic cycling team for this year's Games, he added.

Mr Nichols said she was not badly injured but had a bump on the head and was having precautionary X-rays following the crash, which he described as "malicious".

He said he saw the face of the driver of the Falcon and his female passenger, whom he believed were both aged in their 30s, and said they appeared to find their actions funny.

"Most motorists are really good, but clowns such as the person today are just one out of the box," he said.

Road rules for cyclists

Cyclists riding in groups on public roads can only cycle next to one other rider - a law described by the Roads and Traffic Authority as riding "two abreast" - and must not ride more than 1.5 metres apart.

The RTA's website also stipulates that cyclists must ride in a bicycle lane if one is available and can use bus lanes, except when the lane is marked "buses only".

Contrary to some correspondence to smh.com.au today, the section of road where the crash happened was flanked by a shoulder, not a cycle path.

Children under 12 are allowed to ride on a footpath but adults are only permitted to use them if they are supervising a child.

Ferris said the group involved in today's crash were obeying the road rules before the pile-up.

"We were riding two abreast and 1.5 metres from the left of the lane," she said.

"We were all riding together, we certainly weren't going out there to cause trouble."

Ferris, who said she was feeling "pretty sore" after being one of the first to crash into the braking vehicle, said some of the ignorance in the community about the rights of cyclists on the road was "just astounding".

The original article : http://www.smh.com.au/news/beijing2008/cycle-pack-attack/2008/05/08/1210131112608.html?page=fullpage

That First Push: North America's Bike to Work Programs
By Talia Fanning


"Biking to work totally improved my life," says Kate McCarthy of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. "I'm healthier, happier, and more upbeat." McCarthy started commuting by bike after her car broke down for the last time. "I refused to fix it," she explains. "I'd been so burnt by cars, spent so much money on gas and parking tickets, I vowed to make biking work." Now she helps organize the annual Bike to Work Day campaign, inviting other new cyclists to discover the benefits of commuting by bike.

This year there are over 40 Bike to Work events taking place in cities from Alaska to Florida and Hawaii to New York, some of which, like Cascade Bicycle Club's event in Seattle, anticipate more than 11,000 participants. McCarthy says the biggest effort required is the mental leap. "People think it's too far, or that it's dangerous, or that they'll get to work all sweaty. We give them the incentive to try it. The best pitch to get people to ride is to get them to try it just once."

But if saving money on gas, insurance, and repairs isn't enough to make you leave the car keys at home, what other incentives are there? Organizers do everything they can to make biking accessible. Wondering where to meet up with other cyclists? Stop by one of dozens of commuter stations. Wary of busy streets? Pick up maps and information about bike lanes. Got a flat? Out of tune? Visit an on-site bike mechanic or attend a tune-up workshop. Uncomfortable in traffic? Part of making cycling accessible is making it safe, so many advocacy groups offer commuter skills training programs to do just that. SFBC hosts an annual Bike to Work Day, this year on May 15, which McCarthy says is the highlight of the biking year. "The main thrust and energy is to get people out on Bike to Work Day. Last year it was so rewarding. Bikes outnumbered cars on Market Street, it was so quiet, like a Sunday morning. And there were so many people, and so many bikes." That community spirit is what makes it worthwhile for Lori Garcia-Meredith, the VP of the Board of Directors at Bike to Work Week Victoria in British Columbia. The program is running from June 2 to 8, and ends with a party and prizes. "A lot of people are riding to work all the time. This celebrates those people and invites new people to join. It makes it easier; there's peer pressure to ride."

For Garcia-Meredith, riding to work reduces her daily stress: "I'm actually a nicer person when I ride my bike. You see people on the trail that you wave to and say hello. I start feeling a bit deprived if I don't get my ride." The commuter community built on the roads and at bike racks can then be taken into the office. Participating workplaces compete against other teams in their cities to see who can most reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, log the most kilometres, and register the highest percentage of employee participation.

The Chicagoland Bicycle Federation (CBF) hosts their week-long Bicycle Commuter Challenge, this year from June 7 to 13. Registered workplaces will compete for the highest participation percentage in the city. The higher the level, the better it will be for new cyclists to join in. "It makes it accessible, easy, and comfortable," says Margo O'Hara, the communications director at CBF. "Even if you have power meetings, you can still show up by bike. It makes cycling very mainstream, and it helps people realize that the bike is a viable option for their commute."

Mainstream is the key. The perception among non-riders, that commuter cyclists are a breed apart, is something that Eric Gilliland at the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA) works hard to combat. He says new riders may be surprised by how all-inclusive the group can be. "You're not alone," he tells them. "They're not all crazy, spandex-clad, $3,000 bike people. They're normal people like you and me. Everyone can do this." And in Washington, almost everyone does. WABA's event, which takes place May 16, is a one-day bonanza and is one of the most highly attended Bike to Work Days in North America. This year, Gilliland hopes to have 7,000 participants in one city in one day. The thing to remember, according to Peter Verbrugge, the Event Producer at Seattle's Cascade Bike Club, is that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. Cascade has one of the ambitious programs, a Bike to Work Month, with the main event taking place May 16. "It's not like you have to bike everyday. It's a personal choice," he explains. "Our challenge was to make it for a whole month, because people can enjoy it and see the benefits."

So, if you've been thinking about Biking to Work, contact your local bike advocacy group. They can teach you how. The League of American Bicyclists lists bike advocacy groups by state. Check for one near you at www.bikeleague.org/cogs/resources/findit/. For more information about the above Bike to Work events, visit:

Bike to Work Victoria www.biketoworkvictoria.ca
Chicagoland Bicycle Federation www.biketraffic.org
Washington Area Bicyclist Association www.waba.org
Seattle's Cascade Bicycle Club www.cascade.org

For a listing of Bike to Work programs in North America and beyond, visit www.biketoworkweek.org, a site created by James Ghofulpo in Erie, Pennsylvania. While there is no Bike to Work campaign in Erie, James makes his daily 12-mile commute by bike.

I hate the people of this state. Raise your own kids and dont punish the rest of us for your lack of control:


By BOB JOHNSON
The Associated Press


MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — The Alabama House passed a bill Tuesday that would allow the sale of gourmet and imported beers that have an alcohol content as high as 13.9 percent.

Under current law, beer sold in Alabama can't have an alcohol level higher than 6 percent.

The House passed the measure known around the Statehouse as the "Free the Hops" bill on a 48-42 vote after a spirited debate.

Opponents argued the bill would make it easier for young people to become intoxicated and would increase alcohol-related deaths in automobile accidents. But supporters said the specialty beers cost as much a $7 to $10 a bottle and would be too expensive for teenagers seeking a quick high.

Rep. Richard Laird, D-Roanoke, said young people would find a way to buy the gourmet beer.

"I'm here to tell you a kid who can afford a $150 pair of tennis shoes, certainly can afford to pay a little more for a beer," Laird said. He complained that the Legislature spends too much time passing bills the relax the state's laws concerning the sale of alcoholic beverages.

"We continue to support something that's killing more of our young people in one year than we've had killed in Iraq and Afghanistan in a couple of years," Laird said.

But the bill's sponsor, Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville, said the bill will give Alabama residents a chance to buy imported beers from Korea, Germany and other countries that have opened industries in Alabama in recent years.

Rep. Mac Gipson, R-Prattville, urged lawmakers to pass the bill. He said when police arrest people for drinking and driving, they don't find gourmet beer in the cars.

"Beer is already legal in Alabama. It is not an illegal substance," Gipson said.

The bill now goes to the Senate for debate.

Jackson introduced the same bill last year, but it died when there were not enough votes to bring it up for debate. Jackson was awarded the "shroud" award last year for having the "deadest bill" in the House.

Several legislators said legalizing the specialty beers would help draw more tourists, since the beers are already available in most states.

"People in my district have to travel to Atlanta to get these beers. I would sure like for that sales tax money to stay in the state of Alabama," said Rep. Patricia Todd, D-Birmingham.

But Rep. DuWayne Bridges, D-Valley, said he believes the higher alcohol content beers will soon find their way into the hands of teenagers.

"If it's out there they are going to get it," Bridges said.


Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
© 2008 al.com All Rights Reserved

Bike sex man placed on probation

Cleaners caught Mr Stewart simulating sex with a bike
A man caught trying to have sex with his bicycle has been sentenced to three years on probation.
Robert Stewart, 51, admitted a sexually aggravated breach of the peace by conducting himself in a disorderly manner and simulating sex.

Sheriff Colin Miller also placed Stewart on the Sex Offenders Register for three years.

Mr Stewart was caught in the act with his bicycle by cleaners in his bedroom at the Aberley House Hostel in Ayr.

Gail Davidson, prosecuting, told Ayr Sheriff Court: "They knocked on the door several times and there was no reply.

"They used a master key to unlock the door and they then observed the accused wearing only a white t-shirt, naked from the waist down.

"The accused was holding the bike and moving his hips back and forth as if to simulate sex."

Both cleaners, who were "extremely shocked", told the hostel manager who called police.

Sheriff Colin Miller told Stewart: "In almost four decades in the law I thought I had come across every perversion known to mankind, but this is a new one on me. I have never heard of a 'cycle-sexualist'."

Stewart had denied the offence, claiming it was caused by a misunderstanding after he had too much to drink.

The bachelor had been living in the hostel since October 2006 after moving from his council house in Girvan.

He now lives in Ayr.

Traffic laws apply to persons riding bicycles.
Every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this chapter, except as to special regulations in this article and except as to those provisions of this chapter which by their nature can have no application.

Riding on bicycles.
(a) A person propelling a bicycle shall not ride other than upon or astride a permanent and regular seat attached thereto.
(b) No bicycle shall be used to carry more persons at one time than the number for which it is designed and equipped.


Clinging to vehicles.
(a)No person riding upon any bicycle, coaster, roller skates, sled or toy vehicle shall attach the same or himself to any vehicle upon a roadway.


Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(a) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
(b) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
(c) Wherever a usable path for bicycles has been provided adjacent to a roadway, bicycle riders shall use such path and shall not use the roadway.



Carrying articles.
No person operating a bicycle shall carry any package, bundle or article which prevents the driver from keeping at least one hand upon the handlebars.


Lamps and other equipment on bicycles.
(a) Every bicycle when in use at nighttime shall be equipped with a lamp on the front which shall emit a white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front and with a red reflector on the rear of a type approved by the department which shall be visible from all distances from 100 feet to 600 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful lower beams of head lamps on a motor vehicle. A lamp emitting a red light visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear may be used in addition to the red reflector.
(b) Every bicycle shall be equipped with a brake which will enable the operator to make the braked wheels skid on dry, level, clean pavement.


Violations of article as misdemeanor; responsibility of parent or guardian; applicability of article.
(a) It is a misdemeanor for any person to do any act forbidden or fail to perform any act required in this article.
(b) The parent of any child and the guardian of any ward shall not authorize or knowingly permit any such child or ward to violate any of the provisions of this chapter.
(c) These regulations applicable to bicycles shall apply whenever a bicycle is operated upon any highway or upon any path set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles subject to those exceptions stated herein.



Definitions.
As used in this article, the following words shall have the following meanings:
(1) BICYCLE. A human-powered vehicle with two wheels in tandem design to transport by the act of pedaling one or more persons seated on one or more saddle seats on its frame. "Bicycle" includes, but is not limited to, a human-powered vehicle designed to transport by the act of pedaling which has more than two wheels when the vehicle is used on a public roadway, public bicycle path, or other public road or right-of-way, but does not include a tricycle.
(2) OPERATOR. A person who travels on a bicycle seated on a saddle seat from which that person is intended to and can pedal the bicycle.
(3) OTHER PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. Any right-of-way other than a public roadway or public bicycle path that is under the jurisdiction and control of the state or a local political subdivision thereof.
(4) PASSENGER. Any person who travels on a bicycle in any manner except as an operator.
(5) PROTECTIVE BICYCLE HELMET. A piece of headgear which meets or exceeds the impact standard for protective bicycle helmets set by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or the Snell Memorial Foundation, or which is otherwise approved by the Alabama Department of Public Safety.
(6) PUBLIC BICYCLE PATH. A right-of-way under the jurisdiction and control of the state, or a local political subdivision thereof, for use primarily by bicyclists and pedestrians.
(7) PUBLIC ROADWAY. A right-of-way under the jurisdiction and control of the state or a local political subdivision thereof for use primarily by motor vehicular traffic.
(8) RESTRAINING SEAT. A seat separate from the saddle seat of the operator of the bicycle or a bicycle trailer or similar product that is fastened securely to the frame of the bicycle and is adequately equipped to restrain the passenger in the seat and protect the passenger from the moving parts of the bicycle.
(9) TRICYCLE. A three-wheeled human-powered vehicle designed for use by a child under the age of six.



Purpose.
The purpose of this article is to reduce the incidence of disability and death resulting from injuries incurred in bicycling accidents by requiring that, while riding on a bicycle on public roadways, public bicycle paths, or other public rights-of-way, all operators and passengers who are under 16 years of age to wear approved protective bicycle helmets, and by requiring that all bicycle passengers who weigh less than 40 pounds or are less than 40 inches in height be seated in separate restraining seats.



Unlawful for person to use bicycle under certain conditions.
It is unlawful for any person to use a bicycle on a public roadway, public bicycle path, other public rights-of-way, state, city, or county public park under any one of the following conditions:
(1) For any person under the age of 16 years to operate or be a passenger on a bicycle unless at all times the person wears a protective bicycle helmet of good fit, fastened securely upon the head with the straps of the helmet.
(2) For any person to operate a bicycle with a passenger who weighs less than 40 pounds or is less than 40 inches in height unless the passenger is properly seated in and adequately secured in a restraining seat.
(3) For any parent or legal guardian of a person under the age of 16 years to knowingly permit the person to operate or be a passenger on a bicycle in violation of subdivision (1) or (2).


Duties of person regularly engaged in business of renting bicyles.
(a) A person regularly engaged in the business of renting bicycles shall require each person seeking to rent a bicycle to provide his or her signature either on the rental form or on a separate form indicating both of the following:
(1) Receipt of a written explanation of the provisions of this article and the penalties for violations.
(2) A statement concerning whether a person under the age of 16 years will operate the bicycle in an area where the use of a helmet is required.
(b) A person regularly engaged in the business of renting bicycles shall provide a helmet to any person who will operate the bicycle in an area requiring a helmet, if the person does not already have a helmet in his or her possession. A reasonable fee may be charged for the helmet rental.
(c) A person regularly engaged in the business of selling or renting bicycles who complies with this article shall not be liable in a civil action for damages for any physical injuries sustained by a bicycle operator or passenger as a result of the operator's or passenger's failure to wear a helmet or to wear a properly fitted or fastened helmet in violation of this article.


Statewide bicycle safety education program; manner violations handled.
It is the legislative intent to implement an effective statewide bicycle safety education program to reduce disability and death resulting from improper or unsafe bicycle operation. Violations of Section 32-5A-283 shall be handled in the following manner:
(1) On the first offense, the police officer shall counsel and provide written information to the child relative to bicycle helmet safety. The officer shall instruct the child to deliver the written information to the parent.
(2) On the second offense, the police officer shall counsel the child and provide written information on bicycle helmet safety. A warning citation shall be issued to the child to give to the parent. The citation shall instruct the parent or guardian to contact the police department for further information about the law and where to obtain a bicycle helmet.
(3) Beginning on July 1, 1996, upon a third offense, the police officer shall counsel the child, confiscate the bicycle, and take the child to his or her residence. The officer shall then return the bicycle and give a warning ticket to the parent or guardian. If the parent or guardian is unavailable, the ticket shall be left at the residence with instructions to the parent or guardian to pick up the bicycle at the police department.
(4) Beginning on July 1, 1996, upon a fourth offense, the police officer shall confiscate the bicycle, take the child to his or her residence, whereupon a citation for fifty dollars ($50) will be issued to the parent or guardian of the child. No court costs nor fees may be added to the fine or penalty. The fine or penalty shall be waived or suspended if the operator or passenger presents by the court date, proof of purchase or evidence of having provided a protective bicycle helmet or restraining seat and intends to use or causes to be used or intends to cause to be used the helmet as provided by law.
(5) Any fine or penalty monies shall be earmarked and used separately by the local school system for the purpose of safety education or the local municipality for the purchase of helmets for the financially disadvantaged.
(6) The Traffic Safety Center of the University of Montevallo, in conjunction with the Child Safety Institute at Children's Hospital of Alabama, shall furnish all materials, handouts, brochures, and other information related to bicycle safety used by police departments.

Establishment of more comprehensive bicycle safety program by ordinance.
A municipality may establish a more comprehensive bicycle safety program than that imposed by this article by local ordinance.

Beverly Hills Cycling - a Hint of Optimism and a Dose of Reality!
Capt. Curtis of the Beverly Hills Police Department appeared before the BH Traffic Commission to address one issue, the "SUV vs. Cyclist" incident on August 21, 2007 that resulted in a citation for the cyclist and nothing for the motorist.

Also in attendance were 8 local cyclists, none having met the cited cyclist before but all committed to supporting his fight for justice and all committed to fighting for equal access to the streets for cyclists and equal support of law enforcement for all modes of travel, not just motorists.

Capt. Curtis acknowledged that this incident had generated significant activity on the internet which resulted in a large number of people contacting the Department by mail, email and telephone, including calls from as far away as Australia. He expressed a desire to present the Department's side of the story.

He reported that a third party complaint immediately after the incident prompted an internal investigation into the incident and that "the incident was handled appropriately and professionally." The cited cyclist later testified that the "thorough investigation" did not include interviewing him.

There was a brief discussion of the incident but the focus quickly shifted to a discussion of traffic, safety and opportunities to work together to create a walkable, rideable, livable Beverly Hills.

Six cyclists testified, including the cited cyclist whose position is that the citation is patently absurd, citing him as a pedestrian and for impeding traffic, that the citing officer failed to listen to his complaint of assault, and that the SUV driver was in fact at fault.

The other cyclists urged the Commission to join the cycling community in fighting for safer streets, full support of law enforcement for all modes of travel and the creation of a Bicycle Advisory Committee to ensure an integrated approach to multi-modal transportation solutions.

The Traffic Commission was responsive to the positive suggestions made by the cyclists and there was discussion on mechanisms for creating a safer environment for pedestrians, cyclists, mass transit passengers as well as motorists.

Commission Chair Richard Seff pointed out that Beverly Hills is a small town (30,000 population) with big city problems but he is optimistic that out of something bad they can create something good.

On this note, Capt. Curtis and the cyclists left and had a significant conversation in the hallway. Ultimately, the investigation will be reopened, the cited cyclist was introduced to Lt. McCann, the head of the Professional Standards Unit, and the Commission and the Police Department have agreed to create a BAC.

Capt. Curtis is to be commended for his positive and accommodating hospitality. The cited cyclist was guarded in his optimism and seemed wary as he navigated the complaint process with Lt. McCann. The results will speak for themselves.

As the cyclists said their goodbyes in the sun-baked Spanish Renaissance courtyard, it all seemed to good to be true. Capt. Curtis was a charming host, Lt. McCann seemed genuinely interested in resolving the incident, the Commissioners volunteered suggestions and ideas on funding, committees, actions and programs…

And then…three of the cyclists take off, riding single file eastbound on Santa Monica Blvd., only to find themselves in front of "Road Rage Guy" driving a huge rig loaded with building materials and hauling a forklift, laying on the horn and accelerating at the cyclists.

The cyclist in the back found herself squeezed into the curbside bushes as the driver demonstrated the narrowness of the lane by scraping the brush with his truck. The cyclist's scream alerted the next cyclist who held her line on the non-shareable lane only to have "RRG" accelerate at her. All this on the approach to the red light at Doheny where everybody had a moment to calm down and listen to "RRG" scream that the cyclists were in his way. "You gotta get out of my way!"

Unfortunately for "RRG" the incident took place a few blocks east of the Beverly Hills Police Department and a few blocks west of the West Hollywood Sheriff's Station. He was long gone by the time the two departments responded but the cyclists wanted to go on record, simply as a matter of principle.

45 minutes after the incident, "RRG" drives west on Santa Monica Boulevard and as he passes the cyclists he sticks his arm out the window and points at them, perhaps so delusional that he thinks the Police Officers and Sheriff's Deputies are citing the cyclists. To his surprise, they all jump into their vehicles and chase "RRG" down, cuffing him as he explains that he was only honking because the cyclists wouldn't get in the bike lane. (There is no bike lane on Santa Monica Boulevard between Wilshire and Doheny!)

See you on the Streets!

This is old news but representative of how the law views cyclist, how they make judgement without full understanding - using opinion more than knowledge:

Posted by Jonathan Maus (Editor)

[Ayla Holland (L) and Mark Ginsberg (R)]
Yesterday at the Multnomah County Courthouse the law came down against fixed gear bicycles.

On June 1, 2006 Portland bike messenger Ayla Holland was given a ticket for allegedly violating Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 815.280(2)(a) which states,

A bicycle must be equipped with a brake that enables the operator to make the braked wheels skid on dry, level, clean pavement. strong enough to skid tire.


At issue was whether Holland's fixed gear bicycle met this requirement. She and her lawyer Mark Ginsberg thought it did, but Officer Barnum of the Portland Police Bureau thought otherwise so they brought the matter in front of a traffic court Judge.


[Ginsberg explains how
a fixed gear works.]
According to Officer Barnum, he stopped Holland at SW First and Jefferson and told her that she was in violation of the law and that she must put a front brake on her fixie to avoid a ticket. Holland disagreed. She and Ginsberg claim that Oregon statute does not clearly define what a brake is and that as long as a bicycle can perform a "skid on dry, level clean pavement" it does not need to have a separate, traditional braking device.

At the start of the trial it was clear that neither the Judge nor the Officer understood just what a fixed-gear bicycle was. To help them visualize, Ginsberg likened a fixie to a child's Big Wheel. Once everyone was clear and the cop was finished with his opening testimony, Ginsberg began his cross-examination:

Ginsberg (to Officer Barnum):

"When you approached the rider did she stop?"

Officer Barnum:

"Yes."

Ginsberg:

"How'd she stop the bike?"

Officer Barnum:

"I don't know."

Ginsberg:

"The gear itself stopped the bike."

Officer Barnum:

"But the gear is not a brake."

From the outset, the judge seemed to agree with the cop and it was up to Ginsberg to change his mind. The trial began to hinge on the definition of brake. Ginsberg continued to ask questions of the cop.

Ginsberg:

"What is a brake?"

Officer Barnum:

"A lever, a caliper or a coaster brake hub."

Ginsberg:

"Can you show the court where in the vehicle code a brake is defined as such?"

Officer Barnum:

"No."

Ginsberg:

"Did you at any time during the traffic stop ask my client if she could skid (thus meeting the performance requirement of the statute)?"

Officer Barnum:

"No."

At this point the judge seemed increasingly exasperated with Ginsberg's direction and pointed out that "brake" was a commonly accepted term. To end this line of questioning, Ginsberg offered to demonstrate to the court that Holland could easily bring her fixed-gear bike to a skid on dry, level pavement. The judge declined his offer.

Now it was time for Officer Barnum to ask questions. He asked Holland,

"What would you do if your chain broke?"


Holland:

"I would use my feet."

Officer Barnum:

"What if your leg muscles had a spasm?"

Holland:

"I'm not sure…these are emergency situations."

Ginsberg interjected with a question for Holland:

"Did any of these situations happen on the day you were stopped?"

Holland:

"No."

Now it was time for Officer Barnum to submit his closing testimony. He continued to argue that nowhere in the statute does it say gears can be utilized as brakes (it doesn't say they can't either). He also said that "motorists and the public deserve to have these bikes be properly equipped," and that a "skid is not as good or safe as a stop." "The requirement," he said, "has not been met."

Now it was Ginsberg's turn. He said,

"The state is overreaching in seeking to define a brake as a lever and a caliper. The question remains; is the fixed gear the brake? The statutes are clear that the answer is yes."

To solidify his point, he took out a huge Webster's dictionary and opened it to the word "brake." The definition stated that a brake is a "device to arrest the motion of a vehicle." It did not stipulate anything about a distinct lever or caliper. In his last few comments he proclaimed that the current statute is not well-written and that it is "frightening to require only a front brake."

With both sides at rest, it was time for the Judge's final opinion. His contention was that the main source of braking power on a fixed gear are the muscles of the rider, not the gear itself. To this end, he questioned how messengers—whom he's seen riding "much too fast"—could stop safely.

In the Judge's opinion, gearing itself and/or leg muscles are not a sufficient source of braking power. He said,

"The brake must be a device separate from the musclulature of the rider. Take me for instance. I don't have leg muscles as strong as a messenger…how would I stop safely?"

He then turned directly to Ginsberg and said,

"If your client had a stick she could rub against her tire, you'd have a case. I don't believe the defense has convinced me to broaden the definition of a brake. I find the defendant guilty."

So now Holland has 30 days to either attach a hand brake to her bike and pay a $73 fine, or appeal the decision. In talking with her outside the courtroom it seemed like she did not think the Judge's opinion was fair and I wouldn't be surprised if she and Ginsberg decide to continue the fight.

This decision by the Judge raises some concerns and questions. Will the cops now feel emboldened to go out and ticket everyone on a fixed-gear? Are fixed-gears now essentially illegal? Are fixed-gears truly a public safety hazard?

Fixed gears have become a huge trend across the country and with hundreds if not thousands of them in Portland, I don't think we've heard the end of this issue.

Two weeks ago today, a motorist on Wilshire Boulevard came to an intersection and found herself behind somebody who was preparing to turn left. Under normal conditions this would mean slowing down and waiting but since it was a cyclist, the motorist accelerated and screamed "Get out of the road!" The incident escalated and resulted in the arrival of Beverly Hills Police Officer Prenesti who greeted the cyclist by yelling "You idiot!"

It's clear that motorists are 1st Class citizens in Beverly Hills and that pedestrians and cyclists are not only 2nd Class but must travel at their own risk, unsupported and unprotected by those charged with providing for the safety and quality of life of the community.

This harsh charge is backed up by the fact that Beverly Hills holds the dubious distinction of being 1 in the State of California for pedestrian deaths for a city of its size.

As we approach the anniversary of Bloody September 2006 when 3 pedestrians were killed on the streets of Beverly Hills and a cyclist was killed by a hit & run motorist, it is evident that we have a long way to go if we are to consider the streets of Beverly Hills safe for humans.

If the same number of deaths were caused by drive-by shootings, we'd call it a gang war and we'd call in the militia. If the same number of deaths were caused by the "West Nile Virus," we'd call it a "Public Health Crisis" and we'd be spraying DEET from the rooftops.

But because the deaths are simply the result of motor vehicle collisions, we call it "traffic" and return to the task of speeding it up even more.

Isn't this the missing chapter from Collapse, Jared Diamond's excellent book on great societies and the behavior that caused them to fail?

After the jump is a letter from the Beverly Hills cyclist. On September 6th a group of cyclists will be riding to the Beverly Hills Traffic Commission to speak in favor of multi-modal cooperation and shared space.

Subject: Bicycle Harassment in Beverly Hills
I've been commuting to work daily by bicycle for two years now. I own a car but I choose to ride my bike instead for several reasons including the following: parking at UCLA is very expensive; riding my bike uses no gasoline; riding my bike does not pollute the air that we all breathe; riding my bike puts one less car on the road that would contribute to traffic congestion; commuting everyday is great exercise; I can get to work faster on my bike than in my car because traffic is so bad; and I just enjoy riding.

I believe that we should be doing everything we can to encourage alternative forms of transportation like bicycling to make this city more livable. It makes me very sad to think of how many other potential cyclists are out there that refuse to ride because they fear harassment form motorists and police.

I was riding to work as a graduate research assistant for my PhD studies at UCLA at around 10:40am Tuesday morning (August 21, 2007). I was westbound on Wilshire preparing to make a left turn onto Spalding from the left turn lane when a black Ford Explorer swerved into my right of way, nearly knocking me over into oncoming traffic. I was just able to maneuver out of the way to avoid a collision. At this point I was close enough to Spalding that it was my judgment that the safest course of action was to continue a few more feet along the yellow line and then make the left turn onto Spalding rather than trying to force my way back into the left turn lane. As soon as I made the left onto Spalding the black Explorer quickly accelerated and drove right up to my rear wheel and began to honk at me. I slowed down to pull over and then stopped. She stopped behind me and then I asked, "Why are you honking at me? You nearly killed me back there."

She then told me that I don't belong in the road and that I shouldn't be riding my bike in the first place. I responded by saying that is no excuse to put my life in danger by pulling a stunt like what she did back there. I told her that what she had done could be considered vehicular assault and that I had not broken any law. She said she was calling the police and she rolled up her window and then held down her horn for a few minutes and would not speak to me any more. I told her to go ahead and call the police because she is the one who broke the law not me. She then started driving in reverse down the street to flee the scene and I followed her and waited next to her because I wanted to make sure she would be there when the police arrived. I knocked on the hood of her car gently (not hard enough to leave a mark of any kind) and said, "Excuse me, I'm trying to talk to you." But she continued to ignore me so I just waited for the police to arrive.

A police officer arrived a few minutes later and immediately yelled at me to go sit down on the curb with my bike without asking either of us what had happened. I started walking to the curb and told him that this woman had nearly killed me when she swerved into my lane. He then angrily yelled, "How stupid are you? What are you doing riding in the middle of the street with your bike blocking the road?" His response surprised me because bicycles have equal rights to the road according
to CVC21202.

I said, "Excuse me, but aren't you going to listen to me so I can tell you what happened? And why are you being so hostile to me before you even hear me out?"

He wouldn't listen to me at all and he then went over to the driver and talked to her for a few minutes. When he came back over to me a second police officer had arrived and was standing near me, but he wasn't really getting involved. It seemed like he was just observing things.

After speaking with the woman for a while the first police officer walked over to me and then started yelling at me in a very abusive and degrading tone. He yelled (before he had even asked for my version of what had happened), "You idiot! You're lucky I wasn't here to see it because if I had seen even a tiny bit of what happened I would have arrested you on the spot!" (I don't know what exactly the woman told him that I did.)

I said, "Why? This woman tried to hit me with her car and nearly killed me. Why are you taking her side before you even talk to me?"

He said, "Oh, so you're saying she's lying?"

I said, "I can't say either way because I don't know what she told you."

He said, "I can't believe how stupid you are! You shouldn't be riding your bike like that and If I had seen you in the road in front of her car I would arrest you for illegally detaining her."

I said, "Why are you talking to me like this? I'm a safe cyclist and I obey all the laws when I'm riding my bike. She is the one who broke the law by swerving into my lane nearly killing me and then honking at me even though I was legally riding on the street. I'm not a criminal."

Then he just started laughing at me and he then mockingly said, "Oh, now you're gonna cry?! Look at you, you're really going to start crying?! How old are you?!"

I said, "Well, I'm getting a little emotional because I feel like you won't even listen to my version of events and you just automatically took her side. You can't treat people like this. I'd like your name and badge number. "

He said, "You'll get it."

I then said, "She's the one who broke the law not me."

He then said very smugly, "You quote me the section of code that she violated and then I'll write her a ticket."

I said, "I can't remember the exact number of the vehicle code. But I know it's illegal to drive like she was back there and then to harass me with honking." He just ignored me.

He then went to write my ticket. He stopped after a few minutes and talked to the woman driver again and then on his way back by me he said, "You're really lucky she's such a nice woman. If she had wanted me to I would have arrested you for vandalism."

(I assume that he is referring to when I knocked on the hood of the woman's car after she had put her window up and was honking.) At this point I just completely stopped talking because I finally realized that it was pointless for me to try to talk rationally with him. He then gave me the ticket and I got on my bike and rode away.

I think this is just the kind of harassment that discourages people form bicycling in and around this city.

I have included California vehicle code 21202 which states I may use the entire right hand lane when the lane is a 'substandard width' or 'to avoid conditions that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb' (such as on Spalding) and when preparing to turn left (from Wilshire). The person driving the Ford Explorer violated my rights under CVC21202 and CVC27001 regarding riding a bicycle in the street and regarding the use of horns.

The ticket says: "22400 VC - Deft used bicycle to block vehicle traffic movement" and "21955 - Ped in roadway"

Citing officer: D. Prenesti 421, serial no. 74700.

Other vehicle: Black Ford Explorer, XXXXXXX [license plate number redacted]

Operation on a Roadway: California Vehicle Code 21202.
(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.
Amended Sec. 4, Ch. 674, Stats. 1996. Effective January 1, 1997.

Use of Horns: California Vehicle Code 27001.
(a) The driver of a motor vehicle when reasonably necessary to insure safe operation shall give audible warning with his horn.
(b) The horn shall not otherwise be used, except as a theft alarm system which operates as specified in Article 13 (commencing with Section 28085) of this chapter.
Amended Ch. 993, Stats. 1977. Effective January 1, 1978.

You don't have to go farther than Hollywood to see one reason Bicycle Neglect is so rampant in North America. Consider the 2005 film The 40-Year-Old Virgin. The middle-aged protagonist, obsessed with video games and action figures, seems stuck in early adolescence. The film spends two hours lampooning him for being emasculated, immature -- not a real man. His vehicle? A bike. (You can almost hear the schoolyard snickers.)

To be a successful adult, apparently, you have to drive. Cycling is for children; cycling is for losers. In this view, it's fitting that the pinnacle of the sport of cycling is the Tour de France. (Implied snicker about France as a symbol -- unfair, of course -- of all that's cowardly, effeminate, and weak.)

Call this Bicycle Shame.


Oh, one other thing. A variant of Bicycle Shame that's increasingly heard in Cascadia's transportation debates is that cycling is elitist. It's for privileged, overeducated, white people. For urbanites. For intellectuals. (And they probably speak French.)

In the imagery that's typically invoked, real people -- regular people, who work real jobs and raise real families -- travel by regular means. They drive. They have no other choice. (See this and a recent example.)

These cultural associations are damnably hard to counteract, because their roots are emotional, even sociological. They have to do with in-groups and out-groups, with status, prestige, and identity. Overcoming them, therefore, is as much about creating new associations -- or strengthening alternative ones -- as it is about counterargument.

Still, analysis isn't irrelevant, to which end, a few notes:

Emasculated? Driving a car or truck is about as strenuous as sitting on a couch, while cycling builds cardiovascular fitness and muscle tone with every pedal stroke. The rejoinder to "Tour de France" is "Lance Armstrong."

Childish? Well, yes, the highest cycling rates in North America are among those under 18 years of age. But the young bike because they're not allowed to drive, not because there's anything innately childish about pedaling. Minors are also the most active in team sports, yet we don't think of professional athletes as childish or immature. This stigma on cycling is just Car-head.

Losers? Elitist? Um. Where to begin?!

How about some data? The good people at the Puget Sound Regional Council shared with me their data on commuting choices by household income. Here's a table of the breakdown, from the 2000 census, for residents of Washington's King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties.

Means of Transportation to Work Median Household Income, 1999
Ferry $71,050
Work at home $69,000
Car, truck, or van $66,920
Motorcycle $65,500
All commuters $65,000
Bicycle $61,000
Bus $52,200
Walk $34,000

(PSRC also analyzed the 1990 census, which showed a very similar rank-order of median incomes by commuting mode.)

Clearly, on average, cyclists are neither economic overlords nor hard-luck cases. Cycle commuters are poorer than car commuters, but richer than bus commuters and walkers. (The real elite in the greater Seattle area, apparently, work at home or ride ferries, and the only huge divergence from the norm is that people who walk to work have much less money than everyone else.)

Still, these data are only partial. They ignore the massive statistical influence of age: walking and biking commuters tend to be young, so their incomes are nowhere near peak levels. Drivers tend to be older, so their incomes are higher. Furthermore, these data reveal the median income of commuters but not the distribution of incomes that shape those medians. Are cycle commuters clustered around that median or polarized to the extremes?

Cycling for transportation -- as opposed to recreation -- may, some evidence suggests, concentrate at the two ends of the income ladder, among those with very low incomes and those with high incomes. Cycling also seems to increase with education (as does income): the more degrees you've got, the more likely you are to pedal (and have money). (The evidence, such as it is, is here, here, and here [PDF].)

The very poor presumably cycle because it's affordable: less than one-sixth the cost of driving, according to one reckoning. As incomes rise above the poverty line, cycling plummets, then begins a slow increase as incomes continue to rise. The more educated and richer bike, despite Bicycle Shame. Perhaps they're better informed of the benefits. Perhaps their social circles don't stigmatize cycling as much.

But elitist? What an inverted proposition! Private jets and limousines are elitist. Luxury automobiles and yachts are elitist. You need a lot of money to travel these ways. But bicycles?! A few hundred dollars will outfit you with a basic two-wheeler. Even a good bike, plus accessories and maintenance, cost less than a dime a mile, when you average the cost over the vehicle's useful life. Think about that. Biking is cheaper than bus fare on all but long trips, and most trips are short: half of all U.S. trips are shorter than three miles (30 cents!); more than a quarter are under one mile (see here, slide 28 [large file]).

Biking is the least exclusive form of vehicular transportation there is. It's not restricted to people with money, or people with drivers' licenses and insurance. About 30 percent of Cascadians -- and 10 percent of Cascadian adults -- don't have a license to drive, by my calculations (drawn partly from here). But cycling isn't limited in this way: aside from the disabled, almost everyone over the age of six could bike. As I noted previously, there's no upper age limit on cycling, either.

Biking isn't just cheap for bikers, it's cheap for the communities in which people bike. Bikeways and bike racks are inexpensive to build and maintain. Because bikes are light and (relatively) slow, bike facilities don't need anything like the structural strength of motorways.

Biking is also cheap for nations: they don't have to import as much oil or defend their access to that oil with billions of dollars and divisions of soldiers. It's cheap for health-care institutions: they don't have to treat as many car-crash injuries, as much lung disease, or as many cases of diabetes and others maladies of obesity. It's cheap for our grandchildren who won't have to endure as much climate disruption; cheap for polar bears who won't have to go extinct; cheap for our consciences, our karma, our souls.

Cycling -- like walking -- is democratic: it's equally available to all (or all but a very small share of the population). Consequently, a Bicycle-Respecting community is more equitable than a Bicycle-Neglecting one: Bicycle Respect gives independence to young teens and affordable mobility to low-income households and retirees. Like such democratizing social guarantees as public schools and unemployment insurance, Social Security, and national parks, safe, separate, continuous facilities for cycling and walking put a common foundation under us. Such guarantees bind us together as one people, among whom -- while many things are distributed by the competitive logic of the marketplace -- certain necessities are available to all. We provide these things because we are not simply a collection of consumers who share a currency and a string of freeway exits. We are a community.

Is cycling for children, for losers, for intellectuals? Yes. It's for them, because it's for everyone.

Both photos are courtesy of Brian Hansen, City of Copenhagen.