Just want to clarify my earlier post: I was in no way excusing Cidron’s actions or his decision to drink and drive. I think he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law…DUI, vehicular manslaughter, the works. I think we got tangled up in some side issues – of course, it’s inherent to forums like this – like “what is an accident” and race/class issues. The main point here is the lack of awareness among drivers, inadquate enforcement of existing laws and bikepaths, and cyclists’ responsibility to look out for themselves by taking precautions and riding with respect for others.

Great that you’re harassing the bike lane scofflaws, Steve…keep on keepin’ on. In my experience the majority of people actually to listen to pesky cyclists, although I’m sure we all have our idiot stories.

Over and out.

As anyone who bicycles regularly in the city knows, some of all of these different types of drivers believe they have a pre-eminent claim to the road and that they should not have to obey the rules regarding speed limits, right-of-way, passing safely, double parking, and bike lanes. Such drivers view bicyclists as interlopers and a nuisance. No, they rarely if ever actually intend to kill bicyclists. But do they routinely drive and park in a manner that recklessly creates a risk of serious injury to bicyclists and pedestrians? Yes–all the time. And do the cops do anything about it? Almost never.

In the case of Mr. Cidron, I would say that he engaged in an attack on bicyclists and pedestrians by driving (apparently at cruising speed) down both lanes of a dedicated pedestrian/bike path at night, a path that in many places has physical barrier that would prevent a pedestrian or bicyclist from getting out of the way from an oncoming vehicle. I think there were enough “reminders” on the bike path to infer that, if Mr. Cidron was sober enough to navigate his way for a mile on the path without having wrecked his car, he must have been sober enough to know he was on a bike/pedestrian path (or at the very least on a two-way pathway with a yellow divider in the middle which would require him to stay to one side to avoid oncoming traffic).

Sproule is absolutely right that everyone would ride with a light front and back and helmet. I was almost in tears when I read the interview with Ng’s father, who explained that he had helped his son attach reflectors to his bike just days before the collision. Imagine how that father feels now–having lost his son, wondering if it would have made a difference if he had just attached lights in addition to reflectors, or if he should never have taught his son to ride a bike in the first place. Yes, bicyclists should protect themselves, and ride safely even if it means some level of delays. But in any event, we know from that interview that Ng’s bike probably had reflectors, so unless Cidron was cruising down the path with his lights off, he should have seen Ng. Moreover, it is considered a scenic bike AND PEDESTRIAN path, so Cidron certainly can’t be excused on the ground that he anticipated the travelers he might meet that night would have had a light. No matter how intoxicated, Cidron must be presumed to anticipate the reasonable consequences of his actions, no less than if he decided to drive at cruising speed down a several block long section of the sidewalk surrounding Central Park. Those hex-paved walks have even fewer “reminders” on them than the West Side Greenway that cars are not allowed; no one would be speculating whether Ng was at fault or if Cidron’s acts were “accidental” if Cidron had struck a pedestrian Ng on Central Park’s exterior perimeter walkway.

So my view is that Cidron’s attack last Friday is just a serious and tragic example of the general attitude of New York drivers toward bicyclists (let me say again that there are of course exceptions). That does not mean that these drivers–including Cidron–are “evil” or incorrigible; they just need to be persistently reminded, counseled and educated in a non-confrontational but direct way about the risks they create for others. The Ng killing has convinced me of the imperative need to devote as much time as possible to this task and I’ll be recording and posting footage of my efforts. I urge others who bicycle regularly in the city to do the same. Here are some of the sessions I filmed this morning:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQCOH_xrL5E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiA0Mw9yG3M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_tsDGYE2gA

I know that it’s not easy to find the time or nerve to engage in these traffic counseling sessions, and there is a risk of a violent confrontation. However you could have said the same thing back in the 1970s and 1980s about telling a rude fellow subway passenger not to use multiple seats or otherwise invade other users’ space, and now the situation has completely changed–in part because riders in general have become less afraid to assert their rights (and a lot of other reasons I don’t have time to go into now). As far as I’m concerned, the “streets renaissance” concept is about converting NYC streets from an anomic and Hobbesian contention for space (credit to RightOfWay) to a civilized realm of human interaction and cultural articulation. The only way to get from point A to point B is to start interacting and articulating–online and off.

Then what? Pretty much disbanded. “Well, if BLACKS are gonna ride the bus and sit where they like, we’ll fix their wagon: we’ll destroy the service.”

Look at the photos of the civil rights movement from the ’50s and ’60s. Those are the middle class riding the buses. Very different from today.

So, yes they are linked!

What’s the solution? Clearly, we need better markings or bollards on the bike paths, particularly at the intersections. Better enforcement of the laws would help too – I told a cop about one of the cars I saw on the path and he seemed indifferent. I hate to concede this point, but it could be a little confusing to the unfamiliar driver. The path really does look like a miniture road. In my opinion, some of these accidents (yeah, it was an accident…the driver didn’t mean to hit the cyclist) could be avoided if cyclists were more careful. I shake my head at the riders I see down in their aerobars, at night with no lights, ignoring the red bike light indicating they should stop at a crossing.

Since my messenger days, I’ve really toned down the aggression in the saddle, and I think it dramatically reduces the risk. Get a headlight and a tail-light, stay out of your aerobars, and don’t run the red lights, and you’re much less likely to get hurt. Maybe if Eric Ng had a light (the Times article didn’t comment definitively on this, but it seems that he didn’t), he might not have gotten hit. The car that came barelling down the path at me served away from me as it passed and I have a headlight. The West Side path is generally the safest place to ride in Manhattan, and barring these freak (I’ve only seen it twice in two years) idiotic moves by drivers, it will continue to be a model bike path for the city. I wouldn’t ride anywhere else on my way to work.

Although the New Yorker “Holy Rollers” article was in my opinion a bit lightwieght (and the “cyclists are the n*gger of NYC” comment was just absurd – thanks for including that, Ben), the piece did raise the larger issue of cyclist reponsibility. This cuts across many of the cycling issues we discuss in this forum, including cars in Central Park. Many cyclists ride around like they don’t have to obey the rules, and it hurts our cause. If park racers yell at pedestrians, messengers run over people in the crosswalk at a red light, and delivery guys ride on the sidewalk, that’s how people will see us. We need to ride with some common sense so we are better prepared when the unthinkable happens.

My thoughts are with the Ng family.

Yup if the DOT doesn’t do something, next crash killing a cyclist will be on the protected path approaching the Brooklyn Bridge.

See cars in it all the time. Over the summer, my girlfriend rode into to Bike Habitat to work. THREE DAYS in a ROW she saw a car in the bike path.

And I know someone who saw a car in the bike lane and rode over to an NYPD cop and asked him if he was going to write the car a ticket. The officer told the person to, “Mind their own business.”

Of course it is that EXACT lassiez-faire attitude that is going to get more cyclists killed. That’s gotta change.

Like the cyclist interviewed in the Times, I have often seen cars driving down the path south of the ferry and Chelsea Piers. On Thursday night (11/30) at 6pm, the bollard at the intersection of the Chelsea Piers service road and the greenway was definitely not there — nor was it there the previous day or week or month. I am skeptical it was there when the motorist exited Chelsea Piers.

I can easily see how a motorist could mistake the greenway path for a road at that location, and south of the tow pound and ferry — which cabs often seem to do. Without the bollard (flimsy and inadequate as it is) it looks like a road, down to the big yellow line down the middle. Cycling advocates complained years ago to the State DOT that the path is marked to look too much like a road and that driver confusion was inevitable.

Lastly, I wouldnt be surprised if the SDOT deliberately took the bollards down to avoid lawsuits by cyclists crashing into them — which is why NYC DOT doesnt have a bollard at the entrance to the protected bike path at the south approach to the Brooklyn Bridge. Which is another place where I’ve seen motorists driving straight at cyclists.

“We should work on developing a language and culture that attracts people of all backgrounds to the cause”

it smelled a Ieetle bad. Like, by comparing “the cause” to the Civil Rights movement, you risk alienating some people.

White people?

The Civil Rights movement did “attract people of all backgrounds”. Looking at it as a model for freeing the streets shouldn’t alienate ANYone.

i think it’s really important to avoid the oppression mentality of comparing the bad, problematic, and dangerous use of public space to systematic racism, as one anonymous person did in the recent New Yorker article when s/he said, “bicyclists are the n—rs of new york.”

In this regard, the Adventure Cycling Assocation and the Center for Minority Health have formed a partnership and developed an Underground Railroad Bike Route. Adventure Cycling and CMH formed the partnership to “promote lifelong health through a form of physical activity available to people of all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds” — namely, biking.

Here’s a link to learn more about the Underground Railroad Bike Route:
http://www.adventurecycling.org/ugrr/index.cfm

You are absolutely right. Our streets will become safer when more people demand it as a right. We have a lot to learn from other social movements and it is exciting to think of the possibilities for new strategies. Maybe we do need to be more outrageous in our tactics to reflect the insanity of the situation at hand.

But what I experience as a pedestrian and cyclist is just not comparable to racism. If we truly want to build a mass movement in New York City, we should work on developing a language and culture that attracts people of all backgrounds to the cause.

Why not?

American automobile dependence and its attendant ills — 45,000+ dead per year, sprawl, obesity, oil war, climate change, the list goes on — is responsible for incomparable violence, destruction and evil in the world today.

Not much is going to change unless there is a mass movement to change it. The American Civil Rights movement was a successful and historic effort to effect large-scale social change. If the Livable Streets movement also wants to be a successful mass movement, why wouldn’t its participants compare notes, steal ideas, and learn what it can from Civil Rights?

Al Sharpton has made lots of screw-ups in his time. But he is also, potentially, the exact kind of highly effective and impossible to ignore NYC powerbroker and shit-stirrer we need. The guy created his own power base out of nothing but talk, hairspray and outrage. There are lots of potential models out there. He’s one of them.

I’m not going to stop looking at models for social change just because some stupid, knee-jerk, NYC Liberal orthodoxy tells me that certain modes of outrage, rhetoric or protest only belong to one special constituency and no other.

And Santa Cruz, California, is considering a pass that would allow drunk people to park overnight downtown without incurring a parking ticket. Of course, the best defense against this, but one that will never happen, would be to require that all bars be located near public transit.

The death of this young man, teacher, and cyclist is indeed an injustice. People who care about safe streets have a right to be angry and frustrated. But drawing parallels to racism and the persecution of African Americans is not appropriate or productive to the Livable Streets cause.

Ultimately you are right–I can’t know what Cidron was thinking. My point is that it was both ridiculous and typical for the Time reporters to stress his “accidental” entry on the bike path when they had nothing to go on but the uninformed speculation of park workers, and there was a mile worth of objective evidence that should have tipped Cidron off that he was on a bike path. They should have just reported the facts.