PDA

View Full Version : ACPD Community Engagement Survey



dasgeh
06-28-2016, 03:35 PM
From an email from ACPD




The Arlington County Police Department’s Strategic Management Plan guides the more than 450 men and women of the Department as they fulfill their responsibilities and serve our community. The plan looks to the future, focusing on crucial issues and helping the Department allocate resources to the most essential services.

The Department is in the process of reviewing and updating the plan. Members of the community are invited to offer comments on the future of the Strategic Management Plan through our online survey. To access the survey, please click here (https://www.research.net/r/acpdsurvey). The survey is available in both English and Spanish and will be open until midnight on July 11, 2016.

To review a copy of the current Strategic Management Plan, please click here (https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2014/03/2013-SMP-FINAL.pdf).



Many of us think that ACPD has a bias in favor of people driving, and doesn't do enough to protect people walking and biking. Many of us think ACPD should require all officers to spend time walking and biking in Arlington, and to have annual training in the laws meant to protect people walking and biking. Many of us think ACPD should continue engaging with the cycling community, including working with the BAC and should also work with the PAC (pedestrians). Here's a chance to tell them. You can skip all the questions about gangs and technology, and it'll take you 5 minutes.

sjclaeys
06-28-2016, 03:57 PM
The electric sign that ACPD has at the intersection of N. Van Buren and N. Westmoreland is outrageous. It first says (roughly) "Cyclists Must Obey All Traffic Laws" and then "Including This Stop Sign". Not only is this message probably ineffective in changing cyclists' behavior, I think that it actually promotes aggressive driving behavior towards cyclists by perpetuating the view that cyclists are scofflaws and do not deserve to be treated lawfully.

dasgeh
06-28-2016, 03:59 PM
The electric sign that ACPD has at the intersection of N. Van Buren and N. Westmoreland is outrageous. It first says (roughly) "Cyclists Must Obey All Traffic Laws" and then "Including This Stop Sign". Not only is this message probably ineffective in changing cyclists' behavior, I think that it actually promotes aggressive driving behavior towards cyclists by perpetuating the view that cyclists are scofflaws and do not deserve to be treated lawfully.

Can you get a picture? Is this new? Since when?

Thanks

sjclaeys
06-28-2016, 04:02 PM
I rarely go through that intersection, so just noticed it this morning.

bentbike33
06-28-2016, 04:07 PM
Can you get a picture? Is this new? Since when?

Thanks

I will be passing through shortly. Will stop for a picture.

consularrider
06-28-2016, 04:17 PM
It's like the stop sign at Ohio and Buckeye Drives in East Potomac Park that says that bicyclists must stop, doesn't say anything about the car that routinely fail to come to a full stop at the same intersection.

Tania
06-28-2016, 04:18 PM
Can you get a picture? Is this new? Since when?

Thanks

It's been there at least a week, maybe a little longer (my sense of passing time is notoriously bad - but I feel confident in "at least a week").

MFC
06-28-2016, 04:24 PM
The electric sign that ACPD has at the intersection of N. Van Buren and N. Westmoreland is outrageous. It first says (roughly) "Cyclists Must Obey All Traffic Laws" and then "Including This Stop Sign". Not only is this message probably ineffective in changing cyclists' behavior, I think that it actually promotes aggressive driving behavior towards cyclists by perpetuating the view that cyclists are scofflaws and do not deserve to be treated lawfully.

Instead of getting indignant, why don't you spend about 1/2 hour at that location and count the number of cyclists that don't even slow down for the stop sign? My guess is that a large number of cars do not stop fully, but when it comes to blowing through stop signs, cyclists are the worst.

dasgeh
06-28-2016, 04:34 PM
Instead of getting indignant, why don't you spend about 1/2 hour at that location and count the number of cyclists that don't even slow down for the stop sign? My guess is that a large number of cars do not stop fully, but when it comes to blowing through stop signs, cyclists are the worst.
Seriously? There's a stop sign in my neighborhood that cars routinely blow through. Just last week, a car hit a jogger and ran over her legs. We don't get no stinking sign.

Cyclists blowing don't mangle people's legs

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

bentbike33
06-28-2016, 05:35 PM
I will be passing through shortly. Will stop for a picture.

Here they are.

12028

12029

bentbike33
06-28-2016, 05:39 PM
Instead of getting indignant, why don't you spend about 1/2 hour at that location and count the number of cyclists that don't even slow down for the stop sign? My guess is that a large number of cars do not stop fully, but when it comes to blowing through stop signs, cyclists are the worst.

Point taken that cyclists blow through the stop sign. But the bigger problem would be cyclists coming down the hill. The oncoming cyclists who see the sign now are going uphill.

rcannon100
06-28-2016, 05:50 PM
Instead of getting indignant, why don't you spend about 1/2 hour at that location and count the number of cyclists that don't even slow down for the stop sign? My guess is that a large number of cars do not stop fully, but when it comes to blowing through stop signs, cyclists are the worst.

Indignant is far more fun.

Besides, I prefer to count the number of people who threaten other people with their vehicles. Threat to life from 15 pounds of alloy moving at 13 mph - not. Threat to life of one ton of steel moving at 13 mph. Oh yeah, 36,000 deaths per year caused by vehicles.

Yup Indignant is far more fun.

KLizotte
06-28-2016, 05:59 PM
Well....technically....a law abiding driver could suddenly swerve to avoid an unlawful cyclist (say blowing a stop sign) and accidentally hit another car, cyclist or pedestrian. In that case, I would say the cyclist was fault of the injuries.

All of this is to say that cyclists can cause injuries/deaths too even if the likelihood is lower.

rcannon100
06-28-2016, 06:08 PM
Counsel: Objection your honor. Speculation.

Judge: Sustained.

You can speculate all you want. Do you have any evidence? As indicated in a different thread, we have this problem of the laws of physics. One ton of steel traveling at 25 mph kills. A cyclists - make it 200 lbs - traveling at 14 mph does not kill. There were 36,000 (give a few thousand) automobile caused deaths last year. The number of deaths that involve bicycles, you can count on your hand.

So..... I return to being indignant.

Tania
06-28-2016, 06:23 PM
Well....technically....a law abiding driver could suddenly swerve to avoid an unlawful cyclist (say blowing a stop sign) and accidentally hit another car, cyclist or pedestrian. In that case, I would say the cyclist was fault of the injuries.

All of this is to say that cyclists can cause injuries/deaths too even if the likelihood is lower.

There is a busy school bus stop at this intersection. I have zero doubt some a$$hat flying down the hill and through the stop sign has almost crashed into some little kid trying to cross the street. Or some resident just out walking their dog.

I'm glad they're doing cycling enforcement here.

mstone
06-28-2016, 06:48 PM
There is a busy school bus stop at this intersection. I have zero doubt some a$$hat flying down the hill and through the stop sign has almost crashed into some little kid trying to cross the street. Or some resident just out walking their dog.

I'm glad they're doing cycling enforcement here.
So who died, or was seriously injured? We all know that one time this cyclist ALMOST hurt someone, which is a load of crap in context.

hozn
06-28-2016, 06:54 PM
Yeah, I like the new sign; it's pretty funny. Agreed that downhill is probably a bigger problem, though. Cyclists going uphill are moving slower.

I loved that folks were blowing through the stop sign (downhill) on BTWD when there was a police car obviously parked right across the intersection.

I will readily admit that I don't usually come to a complete stop there (unless there is a car), but I slow down and make sure it's clear / or cars see me. I have seen cars not stop at that intersection, so I don't take that for granted.

MFC
06-28-2016, 07:34 PM
Counsel: Objection your honor. Speculation.

Judge: Affirmed.

You can speculate all you want. Do you have any evidence? As indicated in a different thread, we have this problem of the laws of physics. One ton of steel traveling at 25 mph kills. A cyclists - make it 200 lbs - traveling at 14 mph does not kill. There were 36,000 (give a few thousand) automobile caused deaths last year. The number of deaths that involve bicycles, you can count on your hand.

So..... I return to being indignant.

Agreed. Cars, bikers and peds. all routinely break the traffics laws that apply to them, but cyclists and peds. generally only endanger themselves. But given how some cyclists act, a sign stating that cyclists need slow down is not an open season invitation on cyclists or a reason to get bent out of shape, even if to do so more fun.

Cyclists do kill but it is rare. Usually some Strava-head hitting an elderly person.

sjclaeys
06-28-2016, 09:07 PM
Agreed. Cars, bikers and peds. all routinely break the traffics laws that apply to them, but cyclists and peds. generally only endanger themselves. But given how some cyclists act, a sign stating that cyclists need slow down is not an open season invitation on cyclists or a reason to get bent out of shape, even if to do so more fun.

Cyclists do kill but it is rare. Usually some Strava-head hitting an elderly person.

It would be nice to get some facts to support your speculation. Please, take your time. Also, the sign does not just ask cyclist to slow down. it perpetuates the perception that cyclists all don't follow the law and, therefore, the view that all cyclists do not deserve the protection of the law.

sjclaeys
06-28-2016, 09:12 PM
Well....technically....a law abiding driver could suddenly swerve to avoid an unlawful cyclist (say blowing a stop sign) and accidentally hit another car, cyclist or pedestrian. In that case, I would say the cyclist was fault of the injuries.

All of this is to say that cyclists can cause injuries/deaths too even if the likelihood is lower.


I guess that could be true, but we live in a world of limited resources. In what way would spending those limited resources result in the greatest increase in safety, focusing on drivers of motor vehicles that nationally cause over 30,000 deaths a year or focusing on cyclists that nationally cause less than 5 deaths a years (I remember seeing that somewhere)?

scoot
06-28-2016, 09:45 PM
At the very least, such a sign should not single out bicycles. Automobiles are required to stop there also.

hozn
06-28-2016, 09:46 PM
(5 deaths a year nationally can't be right. Seems like there were that many in DC area last year.)

hozn
06-28-2016, 09:49 PM
At the very least, such a sign should not single out bicycles. Automobiles are required to stop there also.
Yeah, but automobiles generally do and cyclists generally do not. I have seen one or two cars not stop there. I have seen thousands of cyclists (well, probably many of the same people) not stop there. I think singling out cyclists there is appropriate under the circumstances.

Whether they should use their sign for higher-value enforcement is a different matter, though.

Steve O
06-28-2016, 10:35 PM
I think sjclaeys meant that cyclists are responsible for 5 pedestrian deaths per year. I believe that's in the ballpark.

There has been exactly 1 bike on ped fatality in the DC area in the last 20 years. There have been over 1000 car on ped fatalities in that same 20 years - about 1 per week.

People driving cars and people riding bikes break laws with about the same frequency; it's just different laws. How many bicyclists do you know who regularly speed? How many drivers do you know who speed every time they get in their car? The big big difference is that the 3000-pound missile can and does maim and kill on a regular basis while the 30-pound hunk of steel & carbon doesn't.

Time to review:
Why Bikes Make Smart People Say Dumb Things (http://bikearlingtonforum.com/showthread.php?7260-Why-Bikes-Make-Smart-People-Say-Dumb-Things)
We had this discussion before.

Steve O
06-28-2016, 10:45 PM
Time to review:
Why Bikes Make Smart People Say Dumb Things (http://bikearlingtonforum.com/showthread.php?7260-Why-Bikes-Make-Smart-People-Say-Dumb-Things)
We had this discussion before.

Here's a quote from the article:

The few studies that look at specific violations have found that people on bikes do roll through stop signs about 15% more than drivers do (at least in Oregon), but also that drivers roll through them almost 80% of the time, suggesting this is more of a human fault than a cyclist one. Meanwhile, a host of other infractions are almost exclusively the domain of motorists: speeding, dooring, aggressive driving, violating the three-foot passing law, etc.

There are a few areas where cyclists are more likely to break the law, most notably running red lights, though this is almost never a contributing factor in collisions (I suspect it’s because cyclists who run reds do so cautiously, since…well…they don’t want to die). The likely conclusion is that people riding bikes don’t break more laws or fewer laws than when they drive cars, but they do break different laws. Given that most cyclists are also drivers, it’s reasonable to think the levels of lawlessness would be consistent.

Steve O
06-28-2016, 10:56 PM
More from the same article, this part specific to stop signs:

On the same day that Suchi Hui was struck by a cyclist in San Francisco, resulting in one of the only bike-on-ped deaths of 2012, around 82 Americans died in car crashes. Going by averages, roughly that many more died in car crashes the day before as well, and the day after, and every other day of the year.

We’ve been conditioned since infancy to ignore most of these fatalities, along with the behaviors that cause them. If you’re a typical American, your first experience of speeding was while strapped into a car seat, and you rode past half a dozen fatal accident scenes before speaking your first complete sentence. A lifetime of exposure has convinced us to normalize, dismiss or ignore most traffic violations, to the point where we routinely exceed the speed limit despite the knowledge that speeding causes more than 30% of all traffic fatalities.
This normalization is entirely a product of exposure, and that’s what makes bikes so comparatively frightening: we prefer the devil we know, even when it’s infinitely more bloodthirsty than the one we don’t.

Most Americans grow up bi- or tri-modal, getting around by car, on foot, and if they’re like Scott Simon, by transit, which makes these modes feel relatively safe. A driver who merges without signaling is like a pedestrian who crosses midblock is like a straphanger holding open the subway doors: annoying perhaps, but hey, we’ve all been there. It was probably because there wasn’t any real danger, we might tell ourselves, or maybe the intersection was badly designed. We can sympathize, and so we look for extenuating circumstances, unless the violation is particularly severe.

When a bike blows a stop sign, though, we’re more likely to see it as evidence that “cyclists think they’re above the law.” The social psychology term for this bias is “fundamental attribution error”: the tendency to attribute the actions of others to their inherent nature rather than their situation, and the less we sympathize with their situation, the greater the bias. A 2002 study from the UK’s Transport Research Laboratory found that it plays a starring role in our perceptions of traffic behavior, with drivers far more likely to see a cyclist’s infraction as stemming from ineptitude or recklessness than an identical one committed by another driver. It may also help explain why I’ve been approached more than once while holding my bike by random strangers, asking me to explain the behavior of another cyclist they once saw doing something stupid. I ride a bike, therefore I’m one of them.

hozn
06-29-2016, 04:32 AM
I think sjclaeys meant that cyclists are responsible for 5 pedestrian deaths per year. I believe that's in the ballpark..

Oh, sorry, yes that is exactly what he said.

mstone
06-29-2016, 06:35 AM
Yeah, but automobiles generally do and cyclists generally do not. I have seen one or two cars not stop there. I have seen thousands of cyclists (well, probably many of the same people) not stop there. I think singling out cyclists there is appropriate under the circumstances.

Why? If someone were to have a life altering injury it would almost certainly be caused by the one or two cars, not a thousand bikes. The numbers don't matter, the consequences do.

hozn
06-29-2016, 06:47 AM
Why? If someone were to have a life altering injury it would almost certainly be caused by the one or two cars, not a thousand bikes. The numbers don't matter, the consequences do.
I was simply suggesting that if you look at number/percentage of infractions and apply the law equally then it is appropriate to single out cyclists.

I realize you, and others, are suggesting that the law should not apply equally to cyclists because they are less likely to cause damage/injury. I have never expected law enforcement to work that way.

It would be wonderful to see legislation that would actually make Idaho stops legal in VA/DC/MD, then we wouldn't need to rely on discretionary law enforcement.

mstone
06-29-2016, 07:13 AM
I was simply suggesting that if you look at number/percentage of infractions and apply the law equally then it is appropriate to single out cyclists.

I realize you, and others, are suggesting that the law should not apply equally to cyclists because they are less likely to cause damage/injury. I have never expected law enforcement to work that way.

Really? You have never expected law enforcement to spend limited resources where they will do the most good, and instead want them to waste those resources on harassing techniques that improve neither behavior nor outcomes? I guess we do have different expectations.

And, frankly, your argument is revisionist BS. When was the last time you saw a big lighted sign that said something like "DRIVERS MUST OBEY ALL SPEED LIMIT SIGNS INCLUDING THIS ONE" or "DRIVERS DON'T PASS WITHIN THREE FEET OF CYCLISTS, INCLUDING HERE BY THIS BIKE LANE" or "DRIVERS MUST STOP AT STOP LINES, INCLUDING THIS ONE RIGHT HERE, NOT IN THE CROSSWALK BEYOND THE STOP LINE" or "DRIVERS MUST OBEY NO RIGHT TURN ON RED WHEN PEDESTRIANS ARE PRESENT SIGNS INCLUDING THIS ONE RIGHT HERE"? The paternalistic singling out is not being applied equally and is in fact a pretty obvious symptom of windshield perspective.

hozn
06-29-2016, 07:24 AM
Well, if the sign is the alternative to writing tickets, I think it's great.

My experience as a driver has been that if there are problem areas (where drivers are routinely breaking the law), the police sit there and issue tickets.

I have received several tickets in a car, all were situations where my behavior impacted no one (going 65 on the Beltway early AM, not coming to a complete stop at an empty suburban intersection , going 55 on it Rt15 early AM headed to a race). So, no, I do not expect law enforcement to prioritize enforcement in situations of most danger/impact.

And given that I ride many more miles han I drive and have yet to receive a ticket on the bicycle, I wouldn't say that local law enforcement is going overboard targeting cyclists.

Perhaps we have had different experiences. How many moving violations have you been issued as a cyclist?

bobco85
06-29-2016, 07:36 AM
I'm coming in a little late on this thread, but in regards to the Van Buren/19th St (minor nitpick: the road is no longer Westmoreland St at that intersection) electric sign: the local neighborhood has long complained to law enforcement about cyclists not stopping at the stop signs there. Thus, law enforcement has set up stings and/or extra signage, and there is no shortage of cyclists willing to cruise through without stopping (I am a proponent of the Idaho Stop but not when I see law enforcement).

This is an example of law enforcement responding to community input. Arguments can be made all day regarding the relative danger in cyclists versus drivers running stop signs, but in the end, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.*



* and if you're wondering, yes, even at the Intersection of Doom although we'd like it to be fixed rather than seeing temporary increases in police presence

mstone
06-29-2016, 07:48 AM
Perhaps we have had different experiences. How many moving violations have you been issued as a cyclist?

None, but I also haven't gotten any as a driver in 15+ years (spending way too much time in the car). Maybe my standards for driving are higher across the board?

Side note: I hate the argument drivers provide for why they shouldn't get a ticket because "nobody was there". Those are very much exactly the kind of conditions where a pedestrian gets killed because the driver wasn't expecting anyone to be there and consequently wasn't paying enough attention. I'm willing to bet that almost none of the cases where a driver rolls over a pedestrian at an intersection happens because the driver sees the pedestrian and then decides to run over them anyway.

mstone
06-29-2016, 07:51 AM
This is an example of law enforcement responding to community input. ... in the end, the squeaky wheel gets the grease

If only law enforcement responded equally to all communities and didn't decide which were important complaints based on windshield perspective.

lordofthemark
06-29-2016, 08:08 AM
Yeah, but automobiles generally do and cyclists generally do not. I have seen one or two cars not stop there. I have seen thousands of cyclists (well, probably many of the same people) not stop there. I think singling out cyclists there is appropriate under the circumstances.

Whether they should use their sign for higher-value enforcement is a different matter, though.


At the intersection of King Street and Park Center Drive, I see cars proceeding on King Street blow the red light fairly frequently. I have never seen a cyclist blow the red light there. I would not expect the Alexandria Police, if they put in an electronic sign there, to say "motor vehicles must stop at the red light" - they would say "all vehicles".

That is if they were to even put in such a sign. They have not, and I do not expect they ever will. Because a car or truck, blowing through a red light (across a crosswalk that regularly has pedestrians, BTW) at 35 to 45 MPH (its a 35MPH zone) once in a while is no big deal. Not nearly as big a deal as a place where cyclists are blowing through a stop sign. Because of all the reasons Steve O has said above.

lordofthemark
06-29-2016, 08:14 AM
BTW, I probably put in more miles on my car than my bike, even the last two years, and certainly the last 15 years. I too do not think I have gotten a ticket in at least 15 years.

And while I have not gotten a ticket on a bike - I have encountered pushback against bike infrastructure and bike safety initiatives from people repeating scofflaw cyclist memes. The most ironic occasion was at one meeting on the Alexandria Bike Ped Chapter for the Transportation Master Plan, which occurred right after I had joined BPAC in a safety campaign at King and Union, encouraging all (though clearly we were responding to concerns about "scofflaw cyclists") to come to a full stop. I would suggest that punishment, of the entire cycling community (or at least of those of us who want the benefits of things like the initiatives contained in the Bike Ped Chapter) is as serious, or more, than the occasional ticket.

lordofthemark
06-29-2016, 08:20 AM
I'm coming in a little late on this thread, but in regards to the Van Buren/19th St (minor nitpick: the road is no longer Westmoreland St at that intersection) electric sign: the local neighborhood has long complained to law enforcement about cyclists not stopping at the stop signs there. Thus, law enforcement has set up stings and/or extra signage, and there is no shortage of cyclists willing to cruise through without stopping (I am a proponent of the Idaho Stop but not when I see law enforcement).

This is an example of law enforcement responding to community input. Arguments can be made all day regarding the relative danger in cyclists versus drivers running stop signs, but in the end, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.*



* and if you're wondering, yes, even at the Intersection of Doom although we'd like it to be fixed rather than seeing temporary increases in police presence


Yup, and we have talked about this in regards to Alexandria.

Folks seem to be of two minds - some would challenge the notion of LE responding to community complaints about traffic infractions, rather than prioritizing based on data, science etc. The other approach, which I think bears considering, is for bike/ped advocates to make a point of complaining about locations with egregious driver behavior - that will lead either to real improvements, or to the police giving up on things like call/click/connect and similar complaint lines. Unfortunately for me to participate, I would have to spend some time at the corner of King and Park Center (or some of my other favorite locations in NW Alexandria) and monitor enough to feel confident in my complaint. I have not seen my way to spending time that way, thus far.

americancyclo
06-29-2016, 08:26 AM
I don't see any traffic incidents listed at http://www.raidsonline.com/?address=Arlington,VA for this intersection. Maybe ArlCo has more data that is not yet public.

This looks like 'enforcement theater' to me. If there haven't been accidents recently, then there would be no way to judge the signs effectiveness if there continue to be no accidents.

The sign is reinforcing the residents windshield perspective that it isn't 'fair' or safe that the cyclists are breaking a law.

Perhaps the only danger here is to the law that is being broken.

lordofthemark
06-29-2016, 08:36 AM
It's been there at least a week, maybe a little longer (my sense of passing time is notoriously bad - but I feel confident in "at least a week").

Considering that is part of a route that has been signed as a SafeTrack alternative, the timing is interesting. I do think it would be nice if the police, before responding to a community complaint in this manner, might consult with the transportation folks.

baiskeli
06-29-2016, 08:43 AM
If someone thinks cyclists blowing stop signs isn't a safety problem, maybe they should lobby to make it legal.

mstone
06-29-2016, 08:54 AM
Unfortunately for me to participate, I would have to spend some time at the corner of King and Park Center (or some of my other favorite locations in NW Alexandria) and monitor enough to feel confident in my complaint.

You're clearly putting more thought into this than the SCOFFLAW CYCLIST!!>@>!#!!! crowd is. If the only basis for police action is volume of calls without regard to their legitimacy, just make calls.

lordofthemark
06-29-2016, 08:58 AM
If someone thinks cyclists blowing stop signs isn't a safety problem, maybe they should lobby to make it legal.

No one thinks that cyclists blowing through stop signs (which is not the same as the Idaho Stop, which folks have been lobbying for legalizing in DC, though it looks like it will not go through this year - in Va I would think we have more urgent and feasible priorities in Richmond) is not a problem - I think people are questioning why this sign called out cyclists, and did not simply ask all vehicles to stop. What precisely is the loss in asking all vehicles to stop?

mstone
06-29-2016, 08:59 AM
If someone thinks cyclists blowing stop signs isn't a safety problem, maybe they should lobby to make it legal.

Re: lobbying: just take a look at what's happening with DC's attempt to align its liability standards with the 90+% of states that don't have contributory negligence. The all-powerful bike lobby simply isn't strong enough to make idaho stops legal in the local political climate. (Among other reasons, because the "trained and expert law enforcement professionals" are putting up giant flashing signs advertising how dangerous cyclist behavior is, above and beyond anything that happens in a car, and we have to respect their informed judgment...right?)

lordofthemark
06-29-2016, 09:02 AM
You're clearly putting more thought into this than the SCOFFLAW CYCLIST!!>@>!#!!! crowd is. If the only basis for police action is volume of calls without regard to their legitimacy, just make calls.

There are multiple levels. Alexandria Police may still defer to OTCA, but it seems clear that T&ES does not (given that they are going ahead with the bike lanes on Cameron and Prince, and are again proposing moving forward with the Royal Street Neighborhood Bikeway). I think there is still advantage in not being seen as like the wilder folks in OTCA.

ShawnoftheDread
06-29-2016, 10:06 AM
This looks like 'enforcement theater' to me. If there haven't been accidents recently, then there would be no way to judge the signs effectiveness if there continue to be no accidents.

Tiger-repelling rocks!
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160629/68062ad234b6b7cb771bd9114ce8cc25.jpg

dasgeh
06-29-2016, 10:31 AM
There is a busy school bus stop at this intersection. I have zero doubt some a$$hat flying down the hill and through the stop sign has almost crashed into some little kid trying to cross the street. Or some resident just out walking their dog.

I have zero doubt this has happened as well. And that a$$hat was in a car.

This kind of shit would be A-OK in my book IF they ever did this for cars. They don't. They never, ever do. And cars kill people and mangle their legs.

Police have limited resources and therefore must prioritize their enforcement. I strongly believe they should prioritize in a way that protects people, not based on their own biases. Clearly ACPD has a widespread, top-down bias against cyclists, and we have to call them out on it.

dasgeh
06-29-2016, 10:36 AM
My experience as a driver has been that if there are problem areas (where drivers are routinely breaking the law), the police sit there and issue tickets.


Really? When is the last time anyone saw ACPD write a ticket at Lynn & Lee?

Steve O
06-29-2016, 10:48 AM
I realize you, and others, are suggesting that the law should not apply equally to cyclists because they are less likely to cause damage/injury. I have never expected law enforcement to work that way.


Not in the US, anyway. From a previous thread (http://bikearlingtonforum.com/showthread.php?7668-Cyclist-seriously-injured-by-car-running-red&p=96750&highlight=hague#post96750)


To illustrate how traffic regulations in the Netherlands differ from those in America, here are a few mostly hypothetical Dutch cases to consider.

• Let's say a truck is making a turn onto a high-speed four-lane street in The Hague, and rides over a cyclist in the bicycle lane. The accident is witnessed by a very reliable observer whose testimony is likely to stand up in court—say, the prime minister of the country. Who is at fault, and will have to pay damages and/or face criminal penalties? Answer: the truck driver.

• But what if the same accident occurs on a two-lane street with no designated bicycle lane, so the bicycle is riding out in traffic? And what if there are no witnesses or video evidence? Who is at fault then? Answer: the truck driver.

• What if there was a separate traffic light for bicycles at this intersection, and the cyclist was clearly running a red light? Answer: still the truck driver.

• Okay, so...what if the bicycle was coming the wrong way up a one-way street, arrived at the intersection at the same time as the truck, and despite the fact that the truck was on the right, the bicycle seized the right-of-way and dashed straight across the intersection? Answer: the truck driver would have to pay at least 50% of the cyclist's damages, unless he can prove there was no way he could have seen the cyclist.

• Fine. What if a tornado is racing through the streets of some Dutch town, picks the truck up, and hurls it into the bicyclist, who is in the middle of running a red light while going the wrong way up a one-way street, no hands? Answer: the truck driver will probably not have to pay the cyclist's damages, unless the cyclist was 14 or younger, in which case the truck driver will have to make an extra effort to prove that there was nothing he could have done to avoid the accident.

dasgeh
06-29-2016, 10:52 AM
I realize you, and others, are suggesting that the law should not apply equally to cyclists because they are less likely to cause damage/injury. I have never expected law enforcement to work that way.


I, for one, am not suggesting that the law not apply equally. I am saying that law enforcement should prioritize its efforts to stop dangerous behavior. I believe this is what many call "good law enforcement".

Tania
06-29-2016, 11:06 AM
Really? When is the last time anyone saw ACPD write a ticket at Lynn & Lee?

Monday.

dasgeh
06-29-2016, 11:09 AM
Monday.

When? They've even admitted they stopped patrols there...

Tania
06-29-2016, 11:13 AM
When? They've even admitted they stopped patrols there...

Strava says I came through there around 7:38am.

dasgeh
06-29-2016, 11:17 AM
Strava says I came through there around 7:38am.

And someone was getting a ticket? Did you see what for?

Tania
06-29-2016, 11:30 AM
And someone was getting a ticket? Did you see what for?

I saw a motorcycle cop standing by the driver's side window of a black crossover type SUV in the far right lane of Lynn right about 50 yards east of the light at Lynn and Lee. (About where you have to cross the exit lane from GW Parkway and before the "Welcome to DC" sign.)

Best not to get me started on the IOD. I was waiting for someone there at the monolith at evening rush hour a few weeks ago and saw all sorts of bad cyclist behavior -- and yes, some bad driver behavior, but most of it was by cyclists.

americancyclo
06-29-2016, 11:47 AM
When? They've even admitted they stopped patrols there...
Tuesday at 7:49am when I rolled though the IOD, a german sedan tried to right turn out in front of me, I slowed and stared them down. There was an officer in a hi-viz vest standing on the east sidewalk, and shrugged at me in a "what are you gonna do?" manner as I rolled on towards the Key bridge.

They're still out there sometimes, but not always educating drivers.

dasgeh
06-29-2016, 11:51 AM
Best not to get me started on the IOD. I was waiting for someone there at the monolith at evening rush hour a few weeks ago and saw all sorts of bad cyclist behavior -- and yes, some bad driver behavior, but most of it was by cyclists.

I've seen all sorts of horrible behavior there from everyone. The vast majority of people I've seen there -- walking, biking, even driving - are being complete PALs. But I've only seen cars mangle a person's legs, and I don't think horrible behavior by a few means that drivers should be able to mangle someone's legs (or worse) and get a pass.

Tania
06-29-2016, 11:59 AM
I don't think horrible behavior by a few means that drivers should be able to mangle someone's legs (or worse) and get a pass.

Neither do I.

hozn
06-29-2016, 01:16 PM
Really? When is the last time anyone saw ACPD write a ticket at Lynn & Lee?

I don't ride through there often. Last time I did the police had a car pulled over. But it is too bad if they are no longer stepping up enforcement there, as I understand you are implying.

bentbike33
07-01-2016, 08:12 AM
Here they are.

12028

12029

The sign at the intersection of N. Van Buren and N. Westmoreland/19th was gone yesterday (6/30) afternoon.

Mission accomplished, I guess.