What To Do About Alice Swanson?
by Judd WileyJuly 10th, 2008, 4:13 pm
If you’re interested in transportation topics, you’re probably aware that, at 7:40 AM on Tuesday, July 8, a garbage truck hit and killed Alice Swanson, 22, a bicyclist, who was riding just north of Dupont Circle in Washington, DC.
Swanson’s death was a horrible tragedy. She was apparently a very bright, very promising intern at the Middle East Institute, a prominent DC think tank. She recently graduated from Amherst, where she studied Middle Eastern history. She was learning Arabic on the side.
Over the past few days, however, a number of pro-bicycle activists have been using Alice Swanson’s death for political gain. Derk and I’ve watched the unfortunate events unfold over the past few days, and have held our fire. But not any more.
On Wednesday, July 9, an organization called the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA) held a press conference at the scene of the accident. Judging by WABA’s own press release, this conference was an inherently political activity from the very beginning.
- It was intended “to call on the Metropolitan Police Department to conduct a full investigation into the death of Alice Swanson,” as if the department wasn’t planning on doing just that.
- It was intended to “highlight the need for improved bicycling safety and driver education efforts throughout the DC region,” as if only drivers need to be educated on road safety and not bicyclists, pedestrians, and everyone else.
- It was intended to blame the truck driver in the most thinly veiled of ways, as evidenced by WABA’s Executive Director Eric Gilliland’s statement that “all too often drivers are let off the hook when their negligence leads to serious injury or death of a cyclist or pedestrian.”
To ratchet up the politicization of this event, the actual July 9 press conference (well documented in the “urblogosphere”) involved the installation of a “ghost bike” at the scene of the Alice Swanson’s death.
A ghost bike is a bike that has been painted white and is intended to inform passersby that a bicyclist died at this or that particular place. According to the website GhostBike.org, “[ghost bikes] serve as reminders of the tragedy that took place on an otherwise anonymous street corner, and as quiet statements in support of cyclists’ right to safe travel.”
By appending the phrase “right to safe travel” to their description of what a “ghost bike” is, the creators of the “ghost bike” assume that the dead or injured bicyclist was traveling safely, and that the driver of the car or truck that hit the bicyclist was at fault for the accident. In this manner, WABA’s installation of a “ghost bike” at the scene of Alice Swanson’s death was an inherently political statement.
In addition to installing the ghost bike, WABA’s Executive Director Eric Gilliland felt compelled to make a little speech. He mentioned Alice Swanson and the terrible tragedy that was her death and led the crowd in a moment of silence, but he also cranked out a series of pro-bike talking points:
This may seem like an odd time to say this, but there has been a lot of progress made for bicycling in recent years. We are seeing more bike lanes being striped, more trails being built, better bike parking and on and on.
He also praised the DC government for their commitment to his organization’s goals.
In my years at WABA I have never seen a city government more committed to making bicycling a real transportation option for people who live, work and play in the District of Columbia.
He also speculated about who was to blame for Alice Swanson’s death, albeit while throwing in a get-out-of-jail-free card.
The details surrounding Alice’s death remain uncertain, and we are by no means passing judgment tonight. But WABA and all cyclists request that police department conduct a thorough examining of the case and ensure that justice is served.
In this manner, Eric Gilliland and the Washington Area Bicyclist Association - instead of paying their respects to Alice Swanson in a non-partisan, non-confrontational, non-political manner - felt it necessary to do the following:
- Make thinly veiled assumptions about who was at fault in this accident
- Demand that the Metropolitan Police Department do its job
- Engage in self-praise and the furthering of WABA’s mission statement
Whatever the circumstances are surrounding this accident, Alice Swanson’s death was a horrible, tragic event. The District of Columbia and the surrounding areas, and the country as a whole, would be much better off if Alice Swanson was still with us.
But as far as the political statements and posturing is concerned, Alice Swanson should be allowed to rest in peace.
Posted in Bicycles, Politics, Traffic Accidents |
Amen to this Judd. The politicization of a poor girl’s death in pursuit of one’s own aims is despicable.
We, as a nation, can do better.
I’ve never understood how groups like WABA could automatically assume that victims of traffic accidents like Alice Swanson would want to be remembered as martyrs for their cause.
Dark Meaver: The “politicization of a poor girl’s death” wasn’t in pursuit of WABA’s own aims…it was in pursuit of thousands of human beings–like Alice Swanson–who get around by bicycle. It was, in essence, in pursuit of Alice’s aims. She biked to get around; it’s not a huge leap to believe that she might endorse the “aims” of organizations like WABA.
Blog owner: Eric’s statement about driver’s being let off the hook in cyclist-motorist accidents is a fact, regardless of whether it fits in with your own personal agenda, SOW, you seem to have no qualms about using this tragedy to advance your beliefs, making you a hypocrite.
Here’s a scoop for you: regardless of whether Ms. Swanson was in the crosswalk or in the bike lane, she had the right of way; thus, the truck driver IS at fault. The question is one of negligence on the truck driver’s part…was he negligent or did he do everything he could to preclude this situation? That is the question here.
It’s unfortunate and sad, but often times it takes a death before necessary changes are made.
You mention self-praise…where is that in what Eric said? He mentioned progress for bikes; but nowhere does he say WABA cause it all. You really need to learn how to read closely if you hope to avoid making such indefensible statements. You obviously dislike cyclists; this is evident when you condemn someone for making pro-bike comments, as if it were some kind of hate speech.
Regardless of–and indifferent to–your bitterness toward bikes, the cycling population is growing, baby, and we are not going away. Get used to sitting in traffic, frustrated, stressed, working on expanding your gut and destroying your health along with the environment. We’ll continue to pass you by, smiling and growing healthier and stronger every mile.
iconoclast -
“regardless of whether Ms. Swanson was in the crosswalk or in the bike lane, she had the right of way; thus, the truck driver IS at fault.”
….is a completely inaccurate statement. In fact, that’s why drivers get let off the hook if they hit someone who isn’t in a crosswalk or a bike lane. Just because you’re a pedestrian doesn’t mean you don’t have to obey the rules of the road. And drivers are held accountable when they negligently kill pedestrians and bicyclists - it’s called manslaughter and drunk drivers get hit for it all the time.
But by all means, keep believing you are immune to traffic laws and passing cars by as you smile and grow healthier - you’re the one taking your life into your hands.
I can see your point about politicization and part of me wants to agree with it. Perhaps the complaint is more specific to what the WABA said or what the organization is about.
But I think calls for change, safety improvements, police enforcement, whatever, is necessary. It may seem to some as ill timed and self-serving but not all of it is. There is genuine heart and true need to express and to do something whenever something like this happens. I rather deal with the raw and imperfect than silence.
Imagine is nothing had been said or done.
iconoclasst,
“Self praise” is when the Executive Director of a pro-bike organization stands on the very ground where a young woman died and cranks out a series of pro-bike accomplishments that were made in Washington DC in recent years. Things like bike lanes, more trails, bike parking. The unspoken but unmistakable implication is that WABA played an important role in bringing about these changes.
“Unspoken but unmistakable” can be used anytime to imply anything. It’s a phrase that could have taken directly from the Fox News playbook, and is really a last resort effort to make a case where none can be seen. You have to make an effort to read into what Eric said to come up with self-praise. The other take on it is that the CITY has come a long way in making the changes. Keep in mind that the city shares many of WABA’s goals…they are, in effect, the goals of the city.
And even if what Eric said amounted to self praise (which, to be accurate, means praise of oneself), he’s the Director of WABA…when he holds a press conference, the Board expects him to represent WABA’s goals. It’s his job. And I think he did it well and with tact. It’s not a novel idea–it works the same way for all entities, for profit and not-for-profit alike.
A senseless death like this one, horrible as it is, calls for action. And to get action, you need to get attention first. There’s nothing amoral about calling for change as a result of a death that might have been prevented if that very change had already been in place.
By your standards, whenever anything horrible happens in our society that could have been prevented, something that potentially affects a significant portion of that society, no one is supposed to draw attention to it in any meaningful way, because it’s “political.” WABA is intimately associated with city politics–everything they do is “political,” and anyway, one can make the case that everything in life is political. If Eric doesn’t somehow tie in the goals of WABA with the deaths of cyclists in the city, what hope does he have of calling attention to the need for more awareness, education, and changes to the infrastructure? Again, that’s his job.
Lastly, I suggest you both reread your FAQ section to amend this piece:
“Judd: We believe in all modes of transportation – cars, buses, subways, light rail, long-distance trains, airplanes, bicycles, walking. ”
Based on the number of anti-bike rants (and there are a lot) you’ve posted, I think you should come clean and remove “bicycles” from that list. You’re not fooling anyone.
iconoclasst,
If we’re anti-bicycle, how come Lewis Derkins and Alvin MacIntosh (2 contributors to Commuter Outrage) both ride their bikes to work about 1x per week?
Iconoclast,
Your garish joy in this poor girl’s death in pursuit of your bicycling aims is despicable and makes it clear you don’t want Alice Swanson to be remembered for everything she was - a bright graduate of Amherst who was working in a think tank focused on improving the world - but will be remembered as a victim.
For you to say that WABA is helping ‘thousands of human beings who get around by bicycle’ and therefore they are ‘in essence, in pursuit of Alice’s aims’ is a stretch. I for one am a cyclist, but I do not agree with many of the goals of the WABA. For you to assume that Alice Swanson necessarily supports the aims of the WABA is a leap. Did she leave a last will and testament in this regard?
Regardless, what Judd decried in this post was the use of this young girl’s tragic death as an opportunity to highlight an organization’s own aims. Your comments that, “it’s unfortunate and sad, but often times it takes a death before necessary changes are made” reminds me of a young Hitler, Pol Pot, or Stalin.
“The ends justifies the means” seems to be iconoclast’s creed. In my opinion this post argues that WABA shares your disgusting lack of regard for human life as you pursue your political goals.
If you’re interested in what a non-partisan, non-confrontational, non-political press release looks like, check out MEI’s moving tribute:
http://www.mideasti.org/announcement/the-middle-east-institute-mourns-loss-former-intern-alice-swanson
iconoclasst writes: “To get action, you need to get attention first.”
It’s almost as if the radical bicyclists are sitting around, sharpening their spears, waiting for a tragedy to pounce on. Sickening.
Garish joy…where is that in my comment?…no, really, where is it? AOr is that another “unspoken but unmistakable” moment of yours?
“For you to say that WABA is helping ‘thousands of human beings who get around by bicycle’ and therefore they are ‘in essence, in pursuit of Alice’s aims’ is a stretch. I for one am a cyclist, but I do not agree with many of the goals of the WABA. For you to assume that Alice Swanson necessarily supports the aims of the WABA is a leap.”
Hard to imagine anyone not having the aim of not being killed by a motor vehicle while bicycling.
Two things on your completely ludicrous and uncalled for Hitler/Pol Pot/Stalin comment:
1. See Godwin’s Law. Just in case the link fails, here’s a blurb from Wiki:
* * *
“Godwin’s Law (also known as Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies) is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:
‘As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.’
Godwin’s Law is often cited in online discussions as a caution against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons, and is often conflated with fallacious arguments of the reductio ad Hitlerum form.
The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. Although in one of its early forms Godwin’s Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions, the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.”
* * *
2. I supposed “death” under your “unspoken but unmistakable” rule means “murder.” It’s should be clear to anyone without an agenda that I wasn’t calling for genocide or executions to create change.
Ride your bicycle more often.
I agree with Iconoclasst that comparisons to a “young Hitler, Pol Pot, or Stalin” go too far.
I do agree with Meaver, however, that WABA and everyone else who’s engaged in turning Alice Swanson into a martyr should ask themselves: Did Alice Swanson even agree with WABA’s principles? Would she have wanted for bicyclist organizations to turn her into a political football?
Much more interesting and worthy of the history books is Alice Swanson’s work at MEI to improve America’s role in the Middle East, as well as her dedication to learning a very challenging and much-needed language, Arabic. Where is any mention of this in Eric Weiss’s tribute to Alice Swanson at the scene of her death?
I have a mountain bike and like to ride on trails. If I happened to be run over by, say, a 4×4 Jeep, I wouldn’t want WABA or any other organization to stand there and make political speeches.
judd, i couldn’t agree with you more. i think that the bike movement’s treatment of this accident over the past few days has been a disgraceful attempt to garner media attention for their political goals. it’s similar to when the anti war crowd reads off the names of dead soldiers at their rallies, as if the soldiers would have wanted that. i find the whole thing disgusting.
iconoclast,
Don’t bother. What these BLEEP are afraid of is that DC will crack down on negligent drivers, and protect the rights of cyclists and pedestrians. That’s because if this happens, there’s a chance that their auto commute may be marginally less convenient. That’s the sum total of the faux outrage.
–ibc
Icono’s in the right here.
How are we to achieve any civic improvements if we must remain silent following incidents that illustrate our concerns?
Wiley’s comments could be used to suppress any discussion whatsoever. Was it inappropriate to discuss the pros and cons of gun regulation after the Virginia Tech shootings? Should we not discuss the merits of the death penalty following an execution?
Since my comments have been disparaged as going too far I feel compelled to defend myself.
When I compared the motive behind iconoclast’s comments and the WABA’s behavior to that of a young Pol Pot, Hitler, or Stalin I was being a bit hyperbolic.
I used this rhetorical device in order to point out the way that WABA and iconoclast among others was using this woman’s death to further their political goals. Do I believe they are like ‘Pol Pot, Hitler, or Stalin’? Certainly not.
However, the mindset that the ends justifies the means, as evidenced by iconoclasts comment that, “it’s unfortunate and sad, but often times it takes a death before necessary changes are made’, is clearly behind the WABA’s use garish use of Alice’s death to further their political goals.
It’s almost as if WABA is early waiting for the next death of a bicyclist in order to bring about the changes they have not been able to bring through their lobbying and other political activities.
A final point that has been brought up in this post and responding comments. Alice’s death is tragic in the extreme. A bright young woman who clearly had a lot to offer the world and society was killed while biking. That is clearly a tradgedy and loss for both society and more acutely felt, I’m certain, by her family and friends. The implication however that the motor vehicle operator was definitively at fault results in unattractive implications for those asking for more regulation.
I don’t think anyone can make that statement affirmatively unless one always believes tht a cyclist is never at fault for an accident in which they’re involved. The belief that a cyclist is NEVEr at fault defies logic. I routinely see cyclists ignoring red lights (riding right through them) at great risk to themselves and other motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians among other examples of reckless behavior. Would the cyclicling extremists blame motor vehicles when a cyclist runs a red light?
I’ll add in Meaver’s defense, that iconoclasst’s use of Wiki’s lengthy definition of invoking Hitler to disparage an opponent doesn’t mean comparison’s between iconoclasst’s belief that the ends justifies the means are not related to Hitler and other’s belief that some deaths must happen in order to bring about change.
Judd, you ask me how come Lewis bikes a whopping 1 time (about) a week to work? Maybe this explains it…
“Lewis: I live 2.5 miles from work (1.8 as the crow flies), and it still takes me almost 40 minutes to get there on mass transit. I couldn’t move closer unless I lived in the building”
2.5 miles away and he rides “about 1x per week” and takes a 40 minute metro ride the other 4 days?…well, his credentials speak for themselves, don’t they. HUGE cycling enthusiast there! Laughable if it wasn’t so sad.
With a 2.5 mile commute, riding mass transit makes Lewis part of the problem, not the solution.
To all three of you bike-loathing chaps on this site (and the others out there joining in), if associating Alice’s cycling-related death with improved conditions for bicyclists in the city in which she rode is so dispicable, tell me why so many of Alice’s friend’s showed up at the ghost bike ceremony and left messages for her in chalk on the sidewalk around the bike. Seems like those who knew her best don’t have a problem with this issue. I don’t think it’s a stretch to think that they don’t want to see any more of their friends die the way Alice did. I know I don’t.
Oh, and jehoe, you really, really need to read more closely. I never said or even implied that some deaths MUST happen to bring about change. I said that it’s sad that it takes a death before necessary change occurs. If you don’t understand the difference, you might want to just watch from the sidelines.
And who said anything about ends justifying means (as if I said we needed to kill someone on a bike to improve conditions for cycling)? Stop trying to bend my words. You must be a follower of Judd’s “unspoken but unmistakable” philosophy.
This conversation grows more and more meaningless with every new spin that comes along.
Ride a bike.
I do ride a bike and drive a car. I’ve seen unsafe behavior by both cyclists and motor vehicle operators.
Care to respond to the last point in my post? Is a motor vehicle operator ALWAYS at fault when in an accident with a cyclicst? Or could the cyclist possibly ever be the reason for the cause of an accident?
Iconoclasst,
You should really read comments much more closely. I didn’t say that you believed that bicycling deaths MUST happen to bring about change. I simply said Meaver wasn’t absolutely off base when he compared your view that, ‘it’s sad that it takes a death before necessary change occurs’ to Hitler’s and other’s views that deaths must happen for change to occur.
And I cycle to work 5 days a week. That’s why I’m so passionate about the way that the WABA is using Alice’s death for their political purposes. We don’t even know the facts around the accident yet. I have an idea: Cool off and wait for the accident report to come out before trying to use her death as prima facie evidence that we need to take x or y actions. If we truly want to honor her death, we should wait for the results of the accident report and advocate changes that would help prevent her death. Not contrive a solution based on our version of the facts based on our own existing biases.
Folks,
No one should speak for a dead young woman. Iconoclast, I don’t know who you are, but you have no business speaking for her. You assume a position on behalf of someone who is not here to spell out their wishes. Please show some respect.
I also think disparaging someone for taking their bike to work only once a week is just plain stupid. The hardest part of the journey is the first step, and any effort should be encouraged, even if its once a week.
The great Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson had a very distinct philosophy on how to encourage righteous behavior in his congregation. He stated “If I encourage, they will come closer. If I chastise, they will move away”.
Think about it.
G-d Bless.
See you at IHOP.
Mr Kaag.
All of you/us need to stop. I’m a serious bicyclist (thousands of miles on a bike each year) and a driver. Most cyclists are drivers. Also, I myself have been venting about this until I’m burned out on it. This poor woman needs to RIP and all of us in the DC area–drivers, bike riders, pedestrians–need to stop being angry and being looking out for each other. There are plenty of hatemongers out there, and their numbers grow each time the price of gas goes up and each day the traffic worsens. I think most people on this site and elsewhere are intelligent, mature adults who are sickened at the tragedy and sickened at the outrageous reactions by a few. I’m just so sorry this had to happen.
Thought-provoking discussion about a tragic incident is good, but name calling and labelling is not good and not constructive.
I think that WABA’s actions were appropriate. What’s wrong with trying to make the streets safer for bicyclists?
Yes, there are crazy bicyclists in DC and elsewhere but that doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be efforts to make the streets safer for bicyclists and motorists.
Do driver ed courses and instructional material adequately cover how vehicle drivers should conduct themselves around bicyclists? Definitely No.
Do enough bicyclists seek training (such as that offered through WABA) on how they should safely make their way on city streets? Definitely No.
There are many other issues related to street safety. How do we minimize future tragedies?
For the record, iconoclasst:
Reference: DC DMV Municipal Regulations regarding bicycles: http://dmv.dc.gov/info/title-18/chap12_pdf.shtm
Bikes must adhere to the same rules as cars, and must also yield the right-of-way to pedestrians. The only time a cyclist has the right-of-way over a motor vehicle is when crossing a street in a crosswalk.
To further Mr. MacInsosh’s statement - the only time a motor vehicle has the right of way over a cyclist is …..when the motor vehicle treats the cycle as another vehicle and the situation indicates that one vehicle should have r-o-w vs the other.
The garbage truck was to the left of the cycle which was in a marked lane (yes a bike lane is a ‘real’ vehicle lane). No right of way to turn in front of a vehicle to the right.
A tragedy. A great loss for her family, the community and our society.
Suggestion - those who drive exclusively - please get on a bike, at least once, and try riding in the same situations you are expressing thought about. You really do need to see and experience from the other persepective.
I put on 10,000+ miles a year on my SUV. I also put on over 1,000+ on my two bikes. Until I began biking 9 years ago, I didn’t fully comprehend the dangers and the need to improve conditions to share the road with everyone.
WABA and others simply want to make it safer for human beings to have the option to cycle around this city and area in a manner where cyclists and drivers respect one another and are fully aware of the rules and reponsibilites that go along with being on the roads.
No, I was not happy with WABA’s staged event. As a prior poster indicated - changes is generally the result of an over-reaction to an event that we wish never happend in the 1st place - witness the current pedestrian safety initiatives in MoCo that only came about after many similar tragedies. No one pays attention until something bad happens. And the victim ends up becoming the ‘poster child’ to something s/he never wished for.
I’m stumped by the cyclist who said that they disagree with WABA’s goals - waba.org - what of the following do you disagree with?
“Mission - The mission of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association is to create a healthy, more livable region by promoting bicycling for fun, fitness, and affordable transportation; advocating for better bicycling conditions and transportation choices for a healthier environment, and educating children, adults, and motorists about safe bicycling.”
“Goal - A fully integrated transportation system. One that links transit, trails, bicycling, and walking facilities to connect the places you live, work, and play. Make your community a place you can ride anywhere you want to go—safely.”
Iconoclast -
I bike to work once per week at best because it’s hot as BLEEP here in the summer and nasty as BLEEP the rest of the time.
I can’t show up to work looking like a used jock strap, so the bike doesn’t always work for me.
FYI - when I do ride, I have to negotiate very dangerous roads, and I empathize with bike riders. But that’s exactly why I don’t feel that we need any solutions that encourage them to be less cautious - like bike boxes etc…
I think A Human has a good point - we need to treat bicyclists as vehicles and share the road - a big step toward this are some of the bicycle regulations we have advocated for on this site and the drivers education which we have also advocated for.
NoVA Commuter is right, we need to stop the name calling and start having a real discussion about how to prevent these accidents. George is also right, we all need to start looking out for each other.
Hitler? Seriously? You were being a little bit hyperbolic the way some women are a little bit pregnant.
You don’t know what Alice would have wanted any more than any body else does, so it’s kind of ridiculous to fault an organization like WABA for memorializing her when she died doing something that is directly related to their mission.
I can think of worse things than flowers and kind words for a dead woman. For starters, all the horrid comments posted here, particularly the accusation that cyclists and advocates are taking a “garish joy” in her death when they are in fact calling for improved safety measures that might have saved her life.
None of us can speak for the dead. But, let’s theorize for a minute. It’s been nine years since I was a fresh faced college graduate but as someone who is still generally considered smart, talented, attractive, and beloved by her family, friends and coworkers, I think that if I was killed while riding my bike one of the only things that would ease my parents’ pain would be to know who was at fault, whether it could have been prevented, and what might be done in the future to make sure it never happens to someone else’s child- none of which can really be determined without a police investigation, which is what WABA called for.
To test my theory, I just called my mother. We spoke for a while about a family friend who was killed in a tragic motorcycle accident when he was in his early 20s. A full investigation was conducted and no fault was found with anyone, however it was important to his family to know, insofar as anyone is ever able to know, whether or not something could have been done to prevent it. Does a stop sign need to be in place? Is a traffic light obscured by a tree branch? Once those things are determined, steps can be taken to ensure everyone’s future safety.
Those things don’t happen in a vacuum. An investigation isn’t a condemnation. If my body was found with a bullet in it and someone was standing right there with a smoking gun, I would expect that the police would investigate this. And if it turns out the person was my friend, spinning the pistol around a finger cowboy style to make me laugh and in the process accidentally killed me, it would not be my wish for my friend to go to jail. However, I would in no way be offended if I looked down from my sparkling cloud and saw gun safety advocates pointing out the needless tragedy of my death.
My mother can’t speak for Alice’s mother, but she did say that if it were me, she would be pleased that WABA would be advocating for safer roads on my behalf. She also agreed with me that it’s terribly hypocritical to condemn an organization for putting words or opinions in the mouth of a dead woman when most of the posters here are in fact are doing the same thing by assuming that Alice Swanson would object to her memorial and to WABA’s continued commitment to safety. Loophole!
I would say, “shame on you,” but I’ve always despised that phrase and the people who employ it. It’s about on par with “we can do better as a nation.” Ick.
Sarah
7 day a week cyclist
former 22 year old
& daughter and sister and friend for life
Sarah Belle,
Thanks for your comment. I’m not assuming anything about Alice Swanson. I’m not saying she would have agreed or disagreed with WABA’s actions following her death. My problem is with the politicization of her death. A memorial is appropriate, but a highly politicized event with a ghost bike and pro-cyclist soundbytes and thinly veiled assumptions about who was to blame is inappropriate in my view.
For example, why did WABA need to call for a police investigation? Whenever an accident occurs that results in a death, the police always investigate. They want to find out what happened. This is standard operating procedure. Why did WABA feel the need to stand there and call for this investigation, as if the police weren’t going to investigate? The thinly veiled presumption here is that the driver was at fault, and that the police are planning to let him off the hook. Hence Eric Gilliland’s preemptive statement (in the press release) stating that “all too often drivers are let off the hook when their negligence leads to serious injury or death of a cyclist or pedestrian.” He doesn’t come right out and issue blame, but the itinerary of his words tell us all we need to know about his presumptions. This is much more than “flowers and kind words for a dead woman.” This is the politicization of her death, which we find objectionable.
Your example about the handgun is also instructive. You write: “I would in no way be offended if I looked down from my sparkling cloud and saw gun safety advocates pointing out the needless tragedy of my death.” Actually, I would be very offended if the gun safety crowd used my death as an example of why their particular policy prescriptions need to be enacted, since I disagree with most of their prescriptions. And even if I was in lock step agreement with the gun safety crowd, I still wouldn’t want them standing at the place where I was shot, making speeches and turning me into a political football. I don’t know these people. They don’t know me. They’re not standing there talking about my family or my work or my interests. It’s all politics.
As to the “horrid comments,” I agree that there’s some pretty tasteless stuff in the above comments, especially the Hitler/Stalin comments and a few other things. However, I’m not going to take any of it down. This is an open forum and we allow people to come on and express their opinions about our posts. Unless they engage in profanity, obscenity, bigotry, libel, threaten violence, or anything else that is so objectionable that it warrants removal, we let them post whatever they want to post. We do not endorse any of the comments on this site, other than our own.
FYI, I don’t think anyone should get the death penalty, so if a road raging lunatic runs me over and kills me, do me a favor try not to speak for me too much when I’m dead? Danke.
http://www.commuteroutrage.com/2008/07/15/dr-thompson-put-him-behind-bars-shred-his-drivers-license/
I like the part about how annoying cyclists are! I am sure Alice Swanson’s family would be so comforted by your take on the events following her death, since you are so clearly without bias or an agenda.
sarah belle -
First of all, the accident that killed Alice Swanson and the attack on two bicyclists by Dr. Thompson are two completely different situations - so your comparison is a bit fallacious.
In Thompson’s case, we’re talking about known facts about an incident in which both sides are alive to tell their stories, and this guy has a history of doing the same thing. There’s not much question that Thompson is at fault and intended to hurt these people. I wouldn’t blame anyone from the pro-bike movement for issuing statements and calls for justice all day long in that case.
Alice Swanson’s case is different. There isn’t such a certainty about who was at fault, and so the automatic assumption and implication that the automobile is more responsible is really an inappropriate logical leap at best, and an unacceptable vie for political mileage at worst.
I also think that you confuse our “agenda”. It doesn’t seem to get much mileage from the pro-bike crowd that two thirds of our staff bicycle to work - one regularly, myself occasionally. But our only agenda is that people should be afforded with a variety of transportation options, they should be able to choose for themselves which method works best, and they shouldn’t have that forced on them by heavy- handed government.
The “annoying” reference you refer to isn’t meant to paint a broad brush that all bicyclists are annoying. It’s meant to say that no matter what Dr. Thompson thought these bicyclists subjected him to, his actions weren’t justified.
I will admit that we have written posts that have been critical of the bicycle movement and it’s attitude, but that is because we want objective policy decisions based on facts, not appeals to emotion. Unfortunately, the bicycle movement doesn’t always believe in the former, often practices the latter, and needs to be challenged on it, particularly in the area of safety. If we want safe streets for bicyclists, we need to do the investigation you’re talking about to determine the root cause of the accidents. No one is well served by simply cheerleading for the benefits of bicycles without an honest assesment of how to make them safe for everyone.
As you point out, if it turned out your friend wasn’t guilty, you wouldn’t want him punished. Well if it turns out that no one is at fault here, then we need to look realistically at how to prevent these accidents. Standing up to tout the achievements in bike lane mileage and parking isn’t really talking about what happened here. If what would have really saved Alice Swanson is a defensive driving class for bicycles, we need to know that. We don’t need to assume that a driver is “getting off the hook” before we look at the facts.
what a jerk you are. YOU MUST A BE A DRIVER. WABA is a group of bike riders, who are brave and physically strong enough to use that mode of transportation, despite being threatened by motorists who believe perhaps due to their size (auto) that they have the right of way. many motorists furthermore think that bikes belong on a sidewalk, which is illegal. i can’t even imagine how many times motorists have almost hit me because they were in a hurry, not using mirrors, on cell phones, speeding down a densely populated city street also full of pedestrians. i have friends who were hit by cars making illegal uturns, backing up without looking, turning without signaling, stopping suddenly. i was doored on an empty street early on a monday morning because the guy just didn’t use his side mirror since there were no cars coming.
WABA isn’t using Alice Swanson as a tool for their own agenda. clearly, the organization main public involvement is education for the safety of all motorists and riders and her story is an example of why it is needed. the fact that you even mention WABA in a negative light in accusation of exploiting this womans death is actually YOUR EXPLOITATION TO FURTHER YOUR BLOG, a much more selfish use by far. you should be ashamed of yourself, and perhaps if you can grow some synthetic guts, one day you will try commuting by bike and see traffic from the other side.
additionally, WABA would prefer, i’m sure, to live in a world where it didn’t need to exist. but that is not the real world.
Eliza,
You are ridiculous and an example of exactly what this blog is about. Instead of responding to two of the posters’ comments about their problems with what the WABA was doing, you respond by calling them brave and physically strong enough to use that mode of transport.
In a post above I said the following:
And I cycle to work 5 days a week. That’s why I’m so passionate about the way that the WABA is using Alice’s death for their political purposes. We don’t even know the facts around the accident yet. I have an idea: Cool off and wait for the accident report to come out before trying to use her death as prima facie evidence that we need to take x or y actions. If we truly want to honor her death, we should wait for the results of the accident report and advocate changes that would help prevent her death. Not contrive a solution based on our version of the facts based on our own existing biases.
Tell me Eliza, what’s wrong with what I said? It seems that you get on here and talk about how bad motor vehicles always are and your experiences. I agree, they are ridiculous and dangerous many times. But come on, one bike rider to another, you’ve seen plenty of our fellow cyclists making very dangerous decisions that put themselves and others in danger. I in fact saw a cyclist run down this poor girl just last week as she stepped off fo a sidewalk (with a walk signal). Pedestrians get horribly hurt by cyclists as well.
Unfortunately, I think you’ve gone into the deep end of cycling advocacy. If we want more protections for cycling we have to a) convince others and b) take responsibility for dangerous behavior routinely practiced by many in our ranks.
Actually, eliza, the DC DMV Municipal Regulations regarding bicycles is pretty clear that sidewalks are fair game for cyclists:
Chapter 12 gives us: