TheWashCycle

Trippin' blog makes joke about dooring cyclists

Last week Fredrick Kunkle, who writes the "Tripping" blog for the Washington Post, wrote an article about how Virginia joined most other states in the civilized world by making dooring a traffic violation. This is a story that most other local news sources ignored and as David Alpert wrote in his post on the article, Kunkle dug into how the bill found a champion "an aide to state senator Chap Petersen (D-Fairfax) got scars from being doored while biking, yet a police officer blamed him, the cyclist." Which was all good and useful and real journalism.

But then Kunkle decided to make a joke about intentionally dooring cyclists.

Tripping loves bikes of all kinds and gladly supports dooring laws. But about that exception, which focuses only on the driver-side door and exempts people from opening the door on the side away from traffic? We might argue that if you nail an adult riding his or her bicycle on the sidewalk, you should get a $50 award. Double, if it’s during lunch hour on K Street.

It's not a particularly funny joke. And for those of us who ride bikes, it's worse than not funny, it cuts a little close to home. People do get doored in the area. There's even been a case in DC of someone who died because they got doored, and I'm sure it's happened in Virginia. The exception he referred to is even a bit contentious, because in some states - like Oregon and Rhode Island - it IS illegal to door someone on the passenger side, even if they're on a sidewalk or trail. When you're in fear of something - like being injured by a collision with a car, it's discomforting to hear people make light of it or even to imply that injuring you would be a good thing. 

The general rule is that jokes should be made at the expense of those who are more powerful than you, and that making fun of those who are weaker than you comes off as mean-spirited, insensitive and bullying.  Making fun of slave-owners is funny, making fun of slaves is not. Making fun of wall street bankers is funny. Making fun of people who've lost their homes is not. Etc...The dynamic between cyclists and drivers, and who fears whom, sets this up as a mean joke.

Kunkle responds to the GGW criticism

But I also wonder whether GGW -- or maybe bikers in general? -- has lost his sense of humor. When did so many smart people get so literal?

Which shows that he doesn't get it. "It was just a joke" is not in an of itself a defense. Elyse Anders has good advice on this subject

If someone is mad or hurt or offended by your joke, you cannot demand they find it funny. Instead of telling [them] “It was just a joke”, try not insulting [them] in the first place and if you can’t do that, then try using these words, write them down on a note card and keep them with you:

“I am sorry I hurt you. That was not what I wanted to do at all. It was mean of me to say. Your feelings are valid. I should not make jokes to upset you because jokes are supposed to be a thing that makes us enjoy each other’s company more.”

Here, instead, is Kunkle's "apology"

Several people have now issued demands for an apology over a joke that was, admittedly, made in poor taste.  
So here goes:  
I'm sorry I am not Emily Badger. 
Sincerely, 
Charlie Sheen!

Kunkle has a video, here's mine.

Hilarious, no?

What's in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act of 2015

Holy mackerel, Cheh's Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act has a lot in it. In short:

• Lots of data reporting
• complete streets policy
• pedestrian and bicycle priority zones
• stop as yield  Idaho Stop (sorry Crickey)
• dooring language change
• bicycle insurance provisions
• universal street safety education mandate
• targeted for-hire vehicle operator training
• study of a remediation and deferred disposition program
• escalating fines for repeat offenders
• tougher distracted driving law
• a new penalty for aggressive driving
• required side-underrun guards and blind spot mirrors or cameras on trucks
• study of pedestrian alert devices on District-owned large vehicles
• access to video for crash victims
• creation of a major crash-review task force

Thanks to Greg Billing to proving me a link to the bill. 

Unpacking it a bit.

1. DDOT will have to regularly publish crash data, sidewalk closure information and information on citizen petitions for for traffic calming measures on its website, MPD will do the same with moving violations. DDOT will also report annually on dangerous locations. Every 5 years DDOT will report with recommendations on how to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.

2. DDOT is instructed to create Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Areas (at least one per ward) where right-turns-on-red can be abolished, speed limits lowered and more TCO and camera-enforcement can be utilized.

3. DDOT will adopt a complete streets policy. [They have one now, but is one issued by the DDOT Director, and thus can be removed by them at any time. This one will be law.]

4. The law will be changed to allow cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs, just as pedestrians do. DC would adopt an Idaho Stop law. (I had to reread it to catch it) Cyclists approaching a stop sign or stop light will be required to slow down, and if required for safety, stop before entering the intersection. After slowing or stopping, the cyclist will yield the ROW, after slowing and yielding the cyclist may proceed through the intersection.

5. Dooring will be redefined to explicitly include bicycles.  

6. Bicycle insurance will be governed by the same laws as motor-vehicle insurance, and bicycle insurance providers may require policy holders to register their bikes.

7. All schools will have a curriculum available to them on safe cycling and walking.

8. For-hire vehicle operators will be required to learn about issues related to bicycle and pedestrian safety as part of existing mandatory training. And those using digital dispatch will require additional training.

9. The Mayor is required to study a remediation and deferred disposition program for people committing moving violations. 

10. Repeat offenders will see larger fines - up to 5 times as much for 4th time offenses. This will be true for speeding offenses, crosswalk violations, right-of-way violations, stopping or standing violations (including in a bike lane, sorry UPS). 

11. Drivers will no longer be able to use the phone when the car is not moving. 

12. Drivers who commit 3 or more or a set of violations (like speeding or improper lane changes) can be cited for aggressive driving, which carries a penalty of $200 and 2 points and mandatory driver education.

13. All heavy-duty vehicles registered in the District will be required to have side under run guards, reflective blind spot warning stickers and either blind spot mirrors or cameras. This is currently the law for District-owned vehicles.

14. The Mayor is instructed to report to the council as to whether Circulator buses and District-owned heavy duty vehicles can be equipped with pedestrian alert technology.

15. If a District owned camera captures video of a crash all vehicle operators involved in that crash will be informed that the footage exists, the footage will be preserved and the parties will be assisted in acquiring the footage.

16. A Major Crash Review Task Force will be established to review every crash investigated by the Major Crash Investigation Unit and as a result, recommend changes to reduce the number of major crashes.

17. The Kitchen sink

This would represent a major improvement in the safety of DC streets for vulnerable users and put DC at the forefront of American cities with respect to pedestrian and cyclist safety. It's ambitious, but everything on here represents something for which consensus existed among the Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force (which was co-chaired by the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA) and AAA Mid-Atlantic).  

Doored cyclist has a broken hip

The cyclist whose dooring was captured on tape by WUSA9 has a broken hip and a broken wrist. 

t turned out the crash so badly damaged Kaldany's hip that the surgeons had to cut it out and replace it. Police cited the van driver for violating the D.C. law designed to prevent this kind of crash.

The driver, if you can believe it, continues to insist that the video tape is lying.

The driver continues to claim Kaldany ran into his mirror, although it's clear from the tape that he opened his door right into him.

If WUSA9's data is correct, doorings are more common than I thought.

The numbers are staggering. There were about 850 bike versus car crashes in D.C. in 2014. As many as 20 percent of them were people opening a door right into a bike's path.

I only know of one cyclist death in the DC area that was the result of a dooring, and that was many years ago. 

 

Maryland Bicyclist Duty Bill: Update and Request for Information

Maryland bicycling advocates have been relatively quiet this year in discussing legislation.  Last year, we had to stop an ill-advised bill that would require adult cyclists to wear helmets.  When you are trying to stop something, it makes sense to get alot of people to voice their objections just to make sure that the Legislators realize how many different people think the bill is a bad idea. 

This year we were pushing something new, and it made more sense to start quietly. I think I contacted every advocate I knew in Maryland about this bill, but perhaps I forgot you.  I meant to post something in mid-January but that task kept being postponed.  I'll try to catch up a bit here. 

For years the posts on the Washcycle have discussed the unfairness of the contributory negligence doctrine for cyclists.  Last year, I drafted a bill to remedy this, but it made sense to wait in case the entire doctrine was over-ruled or modified in the Coleman v Soccer Association of Columbia case, eventually decided last summer.  Once we had the decision in that case, we started moving forward.  Delegate Al Carr (D-Silver Spring) volunteered to introduce a bill to limite the doctrine to cases where the driver could prove that the crash was caused by the cyclist violating the law.  Delegate Jim Hubbard (D-Bowie) volunteered to co-sponsor the House bill.

While looking for other co-sponsors, I got some feedback from a key Baltimore Senator that the text of the bill was problematic, because the Legislature does not want to re-fight the issue of contributory negligence.  Until then, we thought we were carving out an exception that can be justified even to people who otherwise view the doctrine as beneficial.  But the feedback was that mentioning the phrase at all would  resurrect a matter that had been settled; and there was no way legislators want to have that argument again, just for bicycles.  So the bill was redrafted to avoid a direct reference to contributory negligence, and it was introduced in its current form as HB52. In the Senator Raskin (D-Takoma Park) has introduced SB808, with Senators Forehand (D-Rockville) and Peters (D-Bowie) as co-sponsors.

The current form mainly adds four words "and only those duties" to the section of the statute that has long stated that a bicyclist has the same rights and duties as the driver of any vehicle as specified in Title 21, Rules of the Road.  The idea is that as long as a cyclist is riding lawfully, a driver who fails to yield the right of way and crashes into the cyclist should not escape the requirement to pay damages with novel theories about how the cyclist should have been riding.  Our main focus is right hooks and door-zone crashes, but it should cover other situations, such as drivers failing to yield right of way when making a left turn, or drivers who run down a cyclist traveling in the lane and claim that riding this way is "legal but irresponsible".

The Senate hearing is this Friday, and the advice I have gotten is that we need to do a better job (than we did at the House hearing) of showing that there really is a problem in Maryland, rather than just DC and Virginia.  I know of no appellate cases in Maryland deny damanges to a cyclist whose right of way was violated, and only one trial court case that is truly on point (Ennis v. Argueta, Montgomery County Circuit, 2009). 

But other documentation could be useful.  In particular, examples of police reports that blame the lawfully riding cyclist would be useful, if you know of any.  And if you know anyone who filed a claim against a driver who violated his or her right of way and had the claim denied anyway due to contributory negligence, that would be useful evidence as well (especially if they either got a letter or pressed the matter). 

(Jim Titus is a bicycle advocate from Prince Georges County.  The views expressed herein are solely his own.)

 

Friday Morning Commute - Watch out Portland

Good morning

• "Eight hours in the Howard University Hospital emergency room and five stitches later, I was back home, left to ponder what lessons I could draw from the experience."
• DC Rising - "Washington, DC, built green lanes into some of the city's most-famous and well-used throughways. "They've put a protected bike lane in the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue," Maus says. "That's head and shoulders above anything that Portland's done.""
• And then read this comment too.
• Phoenix bikes profiled on WAMU

Tour De Fat by Joe in DC

Thursday Afternoon Commute - Red Face

Good afternoon

• "The Metropolitan Branch Trail is now open for public use through the SS Transit Center"
• It's getting warm out there, which means a different kind of bike commuting, and the Capital Weather Gang wants to know your thoughts about it. 
• "If you like to bike and you like birds, it’s hard to beat a ride through Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge on Maryland’s Eastern Shore."
• Another - more realistic - improvement to street smart literature below, by Rick Servoss
• Bike proposals that could change cities.
• This might be a sign that the accustions are taking a financial toll on Armstrong.