Can't See the Truth Through all the Forester - (by Michael Canzi)


A little story about what it is like to be a cyclist
in Victoria, BC.

A couple weeks ago, I read in the local paper that a
cyclist had been hit by car and was in hospital. The
newspaper article was short on details other than that
the victim was a 33-year-old male who had been riding
in the southbound lane of Vancouver Street when he
collided with a car in the northbound lane of
Vancouver that was making a left turn.

I called the police department hoping for more
details, but they were not forthcoming. They couldn't
tell me the name of the cyclist who had been hit, of
course, and it would take weeks of investigation
before they would be able to reconstruct the collision
and assign blame, but they were able to tell me that
the collision took place at 4:45 p.m. and that the
cyclist was in hospital at Victoria General.

I immediately turned on the computer, copied the
article from the on-line edition of the Times-Colonist
and posted it on the the Greater Victoria Cycling
Coalition members listserv. In the past, listserv
response to posting about crashes has been predictable
and discouraging: the immediate assumption is that the
cyclist is to blame…

Within minutes, response number one was received from
a person who said that there was "another side to the
story," and that she had spoke to a witness to the
crash who said that the cyclist in question "was NOT
wearing a helmet [and] was cutting in and out of the
traffic, basically ignoring rules of the road."

My response was that this was ONLY side of the story
we’d heard so far, since the newspaper article itself
was short on details about the cause of the crash, but
that we should wait before passing judgement. My
thinking was that her witness might, like a lot of
people, be ignorant of the rules of the road
themselves.

Another person wrote that he'd overheard an ambulance
attendant speaking about the collision who said that
the cyclist was "not staying out from the car doors,
and thus was not very visible, and was dressed in dark
clothing." (Keep in mind that this collision
occurred at 4:45 p.m. in June!)

A couple more GVCC members weighed in with somewhat
more temperate remarks. All in all, though, a
disappointing response from the listserv of a group
that is supposed to represent the interests of
cyclists.

Later in the day, while I was volunteering at a Bike
to Work Week event, one GVCC member who'd earlier been
so quick to blame the cyclist, arrived on her bike and
the speculation continued. If the victim wasn't
wearing a helmet, she argued, it might say something
about their general attitude about traffic law. Also,
she continued, considering where the collision took
place, maybe the cyclist was from one of the half-way
houses in the vicinity…

Later still, at the same event, I was completing a
survey about bike lanes being distributed by a rival
organization, the Capital Bike & Walk Society, when
another active, vocal GVCC member arrived and asked
what I was doing. I held up the survey and explained,
whereupon she grimaced and said they'd probably get a
lot of "novice cyclists" filling-in the survey and
asking for more bike lanes…

Even later still, I overheard a well-placed person in
the local news media talking about the crash. I asked
him about what he knew. "The cyclist is a city
employee," he said. "A transportation planner…
Worked at BC Transit until recently… I think his name
is Chris."

I was floored. I just happen to know a transportation
planner who works for the city, but used to work for
BC Transit, and whose name is similar to "Chris."
We've gone mountain-biking together and had brunch and
dinner together. I even went to a slide show about
Medecins sans Frontiers at his house.

"Chris" is a civil engineer, a husband and a father.
(Apparently these things equate with respectability in
the narrow minds of a wide swath of society.) He is a
level-headed, conservative guy. And, by his own
admission, he is a timid rider, not a "road warrior,"
so he may indeed have been riding close to the doors
of parked cars. But that doesn't excuse the motorist
from completing her turn without checking for uncoming
traffic…

Still, as per usual, many of the most active and
influential people in the GVCC tripped over themselves
to blame the cyclist. There was no speculation about
the car involved in the collision being a dark colour
and "thus not very visible." No speculation about the
car driver being a resident of one of the half-way
houses in the area. Nope. The bicyclist is to blame
in the minds of these "cycling advocates."

I could go on … and I will … at a later date. For
now, though, the most important thing to know is that
"Chris" is doing pretty well. He has cuts severe
enough for stitches and road rash that seems to be
healing pretty quickly. But he also has a number of
broken and/or cracked bones and the pain that is
associated with them. Oh, and, by the way, he WAS
wearing a helmet at the time of the crash. Might that
say something about his general attitude about traffic
law?

Posted: Tue - June 22, 2004 at 08:12 PM          

©