Bike Cop in the ICU, Protests, Walk Outs

Sometimes it seems that nobody is safe from cars. Well, in reality nobody is safe from cars. This was exemplified yesterday as 4 Denver police officers on bikes, on the sidewalk, were run down while escorting students who were protesting.

As the Denver Post reported, students at East High School walked out of class in protest of the non-indictment of Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown. Denver police escorted the students, when apparently a driver had a "medical issue" and gunned his Mercedes sedan, hopped a curb and barreled into 4 officers. KKTV reports that, according to a bystander, one officer was dragged 100 feet before the car finally crashed into a restaurant.

Today the protests moved to Lincoln High School, as students there took their turn marching to the capitol building. The police seem to have decided to take no chances, and rolled out at least 20 cruisers according to local papers.

I can say that the show of force from the police was nothing to joke about. They fully blocked traffic and took no chances with motorists today

I would love to know if the use of more vehicles and the full stop of traffic was in direct response to the out of control driver yesterday. If it was, and I would hazard to guess that it was, then it would be interesting to see if this would affect DPD's handling of future cases involving drivers,

Already Denver has a pretty serious issue with hit and run drivers, not to mention the people who act like human beings and stay at the scene of their accidents.

17 times a day a hit-and-run is reported in Denver

This incident could be a reason to turn attention back towards the inherent dangers of so many people operating 3000 lb vehicles capable of speeds up to and exceeding 200 mph. Sadly I assume that it will just be a blip, a tragic "accident". Already officers have been quoted expressing frustration towards the students protesting, rather than towards the car and driver who may have permanently altered this officer's life. Yes, the students may have used profanity towards the generalized idea of police and policing in this country, but sadly the real dangers go unnoticed and un-addressed just feet from us everyday.

I hope all the officers can recover fully, and I hope the driver with the "medical emergency" has his license suspended for at least a year, despite the fact that this sounds like it may have been a true "accident".

The amazing logic of people parked in bike lanes

Today, once again there were trucks parked within the bollards on 15th st bikeway. When I say trucks, I mean 5 of them blocking the entire block. At first I called the Denver non-emergency line to report them, since this is a systemic issue, thinking it would be a normal day when nothing changed.

Then I noticed that not only was there a driver in one of the trucks, but also a police officer telling him to move! Oh happy day, the cops are trying to help out! So I stayed for a couple minutes to talk to the cop at which point the driver tried to butt in.

Me, to cop: Hey, I called this in today, but it seems like a systemic issue. I also called yesterday and last week a couple times. This is really kind of ridiculous.
Cop, to me: Well I have asked to see their permit, and if they don't have one I'm going to ticket them.
Driver, to me (interrupting):  Why can't bikes stop at red lights! they blow through them all the time! (cop stepped away to talk to dispatch).
Me, to driver: I don't care about their illegal behavior, it doesn't mean you can break the law.
Driver: well it goes both ways.
Me: Then call them in and get them ticketed and I will call you in because you are parked illegally!
Driver: Well I am working!
Me: YOU ARE EATING A SANDWICH!
Driver: yea, well I'm on break!
Me: then you are not working and can move your truck!
Driver: well bikes run red lights.

Leave me alone while I eat my sandwich!

At this point I laughed at the driver and again told him that someone else breaking the law doesn't allow him to break the law. The cop then told the driver to show him a permit or get a ticket. The driver flat out ignored the cop and told me to go away. I waited to see if he would get a ticket, which he did.

As I was leaving a b-cycle user rode around the line of trucks in the roadway. As he did a random lady on the sidewalk, who had seen my exchange with the driver, yelled at the cyclist to "get back in the bike lane". His response "there are 5 trucks blocking it!" I slowed down and we had a laugh about the absurd expectation from the random lady.

I mean seriously, how ridiculous of an argument is "others break the law so I get to!"

The views of motorists are emboldened by police.

Origionally written in August, 2014.

Recently some friends were in town from the bay area. We had some interesting discussions about biking in the different cities as well as laws regarding behavior such as filtering, jumping lights, etc.

Their personal experience led them to be shocked and worried when I said I talk back to motorists, that I express my thoughts and opinions like an equal road user. Apparently they have seen cars chasing down cyclists, forcing them off the road, and otherwise assaulting their fellow people. Predictably, one of the non cyclists in the group piped up about how all cyclist break every law and are so annoying to be around. "[She] is just so nervous to drive around cyclists." This was used as a defense of drivers acting like asshats.

First off, let me say that if you do not feel safe operating a multi ton vehicle around other people, then you should stop driving. You're being nervous because there is a bike somewhere is not the fault of the biker, and the solution is not to make everyone drive or stay home. Maybe get a smaller vehicle, maybe ride the bus, maybe ride a bike yourself.

During the conversation I brought up the need for better infrastructure, the need for safer roads. I also explained how drivers seem to ignore the dangerous behaviors of other drivers (speeding, rolling through crosswalks, generally not looking for pedestrians), and instead focus on the much less dangerous acts that cyclists will do (rolling through stop signs, jumping lights, filtering to a visible spot in the roadway). This week I got a first hand lesson in the blind eye that is turned on drivers.

Police in cruisers: Every day as I ride down the 16th ave and 15th st bike lanes I see cars illegally parked, blocking bikes, forcing bikers in with the cars. Twice this week alone I have seen cops roll by these illegal parkers and not even turn their heads. Not to mention when the cops are blocking bike trails themselves.

Cop blocking a bike trail in 

order to talk to a bike cop...

 
Police on bikes and segways: Are police supposed to follow traffic laws to the letter? Or do they fudge them like many cyclists do? This past week I saw a segway cop (useless) jump a light while...motoring(?) down a bike lane. The next night I saw 2 bike cops patrolling downtown without any lights on their bikes. Great job following the law! Maybe they think they are ninja cops. It strikes me as to hypocritical to ride around, looking to ticket people for not having lights when you don't have any yourself.

In all events, the acts of police only move to strengthen the belief held by motorists that they can do whatever they want, without regard to the consequences. But damn you bikers for rolling through a stop sign!!!

How to get trucks out of the bike lane, safely

As the weather turns more wintery:

Buffalo is making fun of the "snowstorm" that hit Denver last week

I have seen less regular bike commuters in the mile high city. It doesn't come as any real shock, as the bike lanes are almost never cleared (despite assurances that they would), and drivers have once again decided that parking in the few clear bike lanes is totally acceptable.

Actually it's pretty funny. Denver Public Works used to have a dedicated website letting the public know of their snow plan, and included which bike routes would be plowed. They have now let their domain expire: www.denversnowplan.com

Now when I can, I call the police non-emergency number, (720) 913-2000, to report the cars that are unattended, or have been obviously parked there for multiple days. When there are people in the cars, I tend to tell them, nicely, that they are parked illegally. This doesn't often go so well.

It's a weird thing how defensive drivers get when you point out their obvious lawless behavior. 2 weeks ago I had a gentleman threaten me, then drive up the street and wait for me to pass before threatening me more. This is that lovely gentleman:

Well today I again had a chance to chat with 3 drivers on my ride to work. I think I also figured out how to get the people to move without death threats: CALL THE POLICE BEFORE SAYING ANYTHING TO THEM.

Driver on 16th Ave,                            Driver on 15th St,

parked illegally next to a parking lot          Drove inside the bollards to park

The driver on 15th st also had another pickup behind him. Both of them drove around the plastic bollards that divide the bike lane from the rest of the roadway to park next to a "No Stopping Anytime" sign. The Driver on 16th ave was almost blocking the driveway to a parking lot. A lot of good bollards or parking lots do...

So in both cases I snapped a photo, then immediately called the non-emergency police number. Both times the drivers came out to claim that they were doing nothing wrong, and that I shouldn't be reporting them. But, seeing as how I was on the phone with the police, they left rapidly, hoping to avoid a ticket.

I even had another cyclist ask who they should call to report other cars blocking bike lanes. I would like to think that more calls to the Denver PD would mean more enforcement, so the idea or increased reporting should be a good thing. Else Denver cyclists can adopt the growing trend of shaming drivers with stickers, but I get the feeling that drivers don't really care.

Signage for road construction messing with cyclists.

For most of this year the Cherry Creek bike trail has been detoured by construction on University Ave. During that time traffic lanes have been diverted and rerouted on University and Speer. Bike traffic has also been rerouted, as the underpass at University is still closed (except during bike to work week).

Everyone seems to be dealing with it, though from a cyclist point of view I would say that the construction crews are not making it easy. They seem to think that any space off of the roadway (read sideways, bike trails, etc.) are acceptable places to store signs and construction materials. Often the trail, 100 yards away and on the other side of the street from construction, is blocked because a sign warning drivers is placed on the bike trail:

Cherry Creek Bike trail east of

Cherry Creek Country Club

This sign has been moved numerous times by bicyclists, as typically it sits a foot or two further to the right, blocking at least half the trail. Additionally, when it is taken away for one reason or another, the orange cones are left strewn across the bike trail. Worst is that black sandbags are used to weigh the sign down since the angle throws it off balance. More than once I have been riding at night to find the black, non-reflective sandbags left in the middle of the trail, creating a terrible hazard to the riders. Combined with bad lighting (there are no lights on the trail), the trail becomes dangerous after dark due to this ineptitude.

But what can be done? After all the construction crews think that the best place to place traffic devices is directly in the crosswalk:

Crosswalk at University Ave and Cherry Creek S Dr.

This intersection becomes very congested during rush hour with bikes, peds and cars all wanting space. Effectively road users have to either move the construction equipment or move into the middle of the street to avoid it. Neither choice should have to be made.

But I suppose we were warned. After all if you are travelling northwest on the Cherry Creek trail, 1/2 a mile from the construction and travelling away from it, you are treated to notice about the construction you just passed:

I firmly believe that this sign is installed for the Country Club that seems to have an issue with it's member's interactions with the bike path.

By November of this year the construction will hopefully be completed. The attitudes speak to the respect car drivers and employees of the city hold towards other road users. Basically it's a big middle finger at cyclists's and pedestrian rights...except that your car is much more annoying than a hand gesture:

What a great spot to park! Screw you bike lane!

9 News, Crappy "reporting" during Co Bike Month.

As opposed to much of the country, Colorado celebrates bike month during June instead of May. We even get our own bike to work day (June 25th), separate from the National Bike to work day. So as most other states have moved back to ignoring cyclists, news reporting in Denver is still writing articles somewhat tied to the subject of biking.

Enter 9 News. Today they ran a story under the headline "Cyclists at fault for several auto vs. bike crashes".

OMG, several crashes have been deemed to be the fault of cyclists? So is that several of the 113 COLLISIONS between autos and cyclists this year? Does it include the 330 collisions from 2013? How many is several? Is several less than the "dozens" of tickets handed out during a 4/20 rally?

"Dozens" of citations = 63

Well, from the 9 news article we will never know. It's almost like they are unwilling to give actual numbers, or do real reporting, because that might take away from the story, that cyclists should learn how to share the road. They even give a handy list of do's and don'ts for road users, such as (my annotations in bold):

Establish eye contact with drivers before crossing in front of them. Don't assume that all drivers will yield. [Even if it is state law]

Allow at least three feet between your car and cyclists or pedestrians when passing. [Because you can get arrested for passing within 3 feet]

Be aware of factors that might impact your driving ability, for example, medications, alcohol, fatigue, weather conditions, and poor lighting and visibility. [Never drink and drive]

This kind of hack "reporting" just gives fodder to those idiots who believe cyclists should "have insurance", or "pay registration" based on the fact that a vast minority of collisions between bikes and automobiles might be the fault of the cyclist. Never is it brought up how cyclists damage the road at a factor of a square of the rate of automobiles, that more than 35,000 road users die every year because of motor vehicles, or the effects on health and the environment caused by personal automobile use. No, instead lets just blame cyclists and then do nothing.

So to recap, 9 News wants to tie in that June is a month where Colorado focuses on cycling. So they bring that in by saying "several" collisions are the fault of cyclists, ignore who's at fault for the vast majority of the collisions, then give some cookie cutter ideas on how everyone should act around each other in such a bland way that they don't even mention the laws in Colorado, or how they affect the rules of the road.

But yay...bike month...right?

Washington Post Writer Horrendously wrong, misleading readers!

Washington Post staff writer/blogger Lenny Bernstein has made a fool of himself with an article formerly titled "Cities with bike share programs see rise in cyclist head injuries".

Streetsblog USA captured the headline before it was altered

The basic premise of the article is that for rider safety, bike share programs should provide helmets with the bikes. Lenny "backs up" this assertion by citing Public Bicycle Share Programs and Head Injuries by Janessa M. Graves, Barry Pless, Lynne Moore, Avery B. Nathens, Garth Hunte, and Frederick P. Rivara

As many have been quick to point out, Lenny doesn't seem to understand how statistics work. Lenny says:

In the first study of its kind, researchers from Washington State University and elsewhere found a 14 percent greater risk of head injuries to cyclists associated with cities that have bike share programs. In fact, when they compared raw head injury data for cyclists in five cities before and after they added bike share programs, the researchers found a 7.8 percent increase in the number of head injuries to cyclists.

When they looked at the same data for five cities that don’t have bike share programs, the number of head injuries had declined a bit, by 2.3 percent.

Sounds scary. The point seems clear, if you are in a city with bike share, the number of injuries, and especially head injuries, is on the rise! Problem being, that some people can actually read and understand academic papers, and Lenny was quickly shot down by Kay Teschke, a University of British Columbia public health professor:

In fact, the study showed that all injuries, including head injuries, decreased in the 5 BIKE SHARE cities after implementation. All injuries went down from 757 to 545 per year (down 28%). Head injuries went down from 319 to 273 per year (down 14%). Moderate to severe head injuries also declined from 162 to 119 per year (though some were unclassified as to severity). 

 In comparison, in the 5 NON-bike share cities in the matched time periods, all injuries increased slightly from 932 to 953 per year (up [2%]). Head injuries in the NON-bike share cities decreased slightly from 356 to 342 per year (down 4%). Moderate to severe head injuries increased from 181 to 192 per year (though once again some were unclassified as to severity).  

 ...

I did correct for the 2-year time period pre implementation. If you check table 2 of the scientific paper, you will see I used the actual numbers reported for the post-implementation 12 month period, but for the pre implementation period, I divided all the numbers by 2 to account for the 24 month period. 

Oh, it seems really clear that Lenny may be intentionally leaving out the numbers to make the percentages more frightening. Cities with bike share saw a huge DECREASE in injuries overall. It seems that head injuries decreased at a slower rate, meaning that as a percentage of total injuries, head injuries increased.

So to me it is pretty cut and dry, Lenny didn't understand a statistical analysis, and so focused on a increased percentage to "make his point". Well, after being so obviously wrong, the article must have been taken down. Nope! Lenny changed his title to "Proportion of head injuries rises in cities with bike share programs"

Oh Lenny

Rather than admit that he was wrong, Lenny is desperately holding onto his original premise and hoping you don't actually read his references. This is such appalling BS that is clearly meant to catch headlines through scare tactics.

So let us be clear. Bike share lessened the number of injuries within the 5 cities studied. The cause of this decrease is debatable, but the decrease in ALL INJURIES in very apparent. Lenny still argues that the article is valid because the percentages are increasing, but then falsely asserts that it means you are more likely to get a head injury in bike share cities than in non-bike share cities.

For more terrible reporting, follow Lenny on the twitter box @LennyMBernstein