Toronto Bike-Car Incident Serves as Catalyst

As some people posted in the comments of this post, the Toronto incident is a bit more complex than just a driver hitting a cyclist and dragging him alongside his car. In fact the bike collision seems minor and it was the aftermath that got ugly. Nonetheless the incident has become a catalyst for protests and discussion in Toronto.

hundreds of cyclists protested at the site of the accident. They lay their bikes on the road and barked like dogs — a special bicycle messenger tribute.

"This change going on on the streets is happening on the fly," [Noah Budnic of the North American Alliance for Biking and Walking] says. "They're learning how to behave differently and drive and bike on streets that are still designed for cars. So there's a lot of tension because people are just making it up as they go along."

Road rage expert David Weisenthal, a psychologist at Toronto's York University, says it's that sense of unpredictability, combined with a desire for revenge, that leads to conflicts.

"We know we will never see the other drivers again who are in front of us, in back of us, alongside of us," Weisenthal says. "We also have a sense of anonymity so that we feel freer to act in what may very often be a nasty manner."

I could do without the description of cyclist behavior as "The bikes weave in and out of car traffic and dart across streetcar tracks." There is more in the audio than the text - like a guy who yells out "you're in the bike lane" as he passes at drivers who were illegally using the bike lane.

Update: There has also been criticism of the Toronto police for sending a clearly-drunk cyclist home on his bike. While a bad idea, drunk cycling is not illegal in Toronto. Even in the states, BUI varies from state to state - it's legal in South Dakota, illegal in Oregon and ill-defined in a lot of places.

While looking for the above story, I found two other, tangentially-related, NPR stories that I may not have linked to before.

Car vs. Cyclist (not Driver vs. Cyclist)
For the Love of a Ghost Bike

Richard Layman discussed this on his blog and linked to an article by Christopher Hume.

What's needed most is a sea change in civic attitudes; it's time to put aside old ideas that the streets belong to drivers and that the rest of us have no place on them, except on the most limited basis.

Comments

[Joe D]

Did I mis-hear? I thought the "You're in the bike lane" was directed at drivers traveling in the bus/taxi/bike restricted lane from a stationary observer on the sidewalk, not a cyclist passing stopped cars blocking the bike lane.

[Washcycle]

You heard right, and I got it wrong even though I heard the story four times.

[W. K. Lis]

There was also the question of whether or not the police should have released the cyclist an hour before, with the cyclist appearing to be drunk at the time.

Can cyclists ride drunk?

[Washcycle]

As it turns out, you">http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/09/04/10743401-sun.html">you can bike drunk in Ontario. It's still a bad idea, and if it were America, I'm sure there would be a lawsuit in the works.

[fpeditors]

We argue endlessly about behavior and fault. But problem is the system itself. There can never be peaceful coexistence between car and bike. The car cannot even coexist with itself. It must be eliminated from planet earth.

[geoffrey]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufM7zvX3-tM

from the pictures his chain was off. It being a fixed gear bike suggests the rear triangle sustained damage. From the video linked above it looks to me he rode the hood for awhile. Minor?

[Washcycle]

Right, but he rode the hood after he jumped on the car right? The initial collision may have damaged his frame, but there's no indication he was hurt. Unhurt cyclist = minor in my opinion. You're definition may vary.