This looks like a good strategy for safety advocates

Matt O'Toole wrote:
"Trent Piepho" wrote in message
...


Cycling is considered a dangerous activity, and this (false) perception
discourages people from engaging in it. So-called cycling advocacy groups
blowing the number of cyclists killed out of proportion as proof that the
streets aren't safe do cyclists no favors.


Sorry pal, gotta cut you off here. Which cycling advocacy groups do this?
Quotes, please...

Sadly, the League of American Bicyclists took a similar strategy in some
of its money-begging letters a year or two ago. No quotes, because I
pitched the letters, but I recall one that showed a montage of
headlines, things like "Cyclist killed on Route 9..." "Bikers injured
by drunken driver..." etc. IIRC, the letter from the League officer
gave a harrowing account of a near-escape she'd experienced.

The point of the letter was "They're trying to kill you out there, send
us money." To me, it was counterproductive at best.

It's only one of the ways the League has sadly disappointed me in recent
years. They seem to have lost their focus and disenfranchised their
members.

See http://www.labreform.org/



--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

"Zippy the Pinhead" wrote in message
s.com...
http://tinyurl.com/w7b6

Here in Britain when gamekeepers kill vermin they sometimes nail the
dead bodies up on a fence, to discourage the others. It's the same
principle.

Displaying mangled bikes is better than displying mangled riders, I
suppose, but about as friendly as placing a burning cross on
somebody's front lawn.

Jeremy Parker

(Trent Piepho) wrote in message ...
In article ,
Matt O'Toole wrote:
"Trent Piepho" wrote in message
...
Cycling is considered a dangerous activity, and this (false) perception
discourages people from engaging in it. So-called cycling advocacy groups
blowing the number of cyclists killed out of proportion as proof that the
streets aren't safe do cyclists no favors.
Sorry pal, gotta cut you off here. Which cycling advocacy groups do this?
Quotes, please...

How about the story from the original post? http://tinyurl.com/w7b6

1. This wasn't done by a cycling advocacy group of any sort. It was
done by a single individual. Interestingly, he tried to remain
anonymous, and did remain anonymous, even among other local cyclists,
until after the bikes had already been placed. (He only gave his name
in the end because the newspaper more or less insisted on it and he
still wasn't too happy about it.)

2. The idea was very controversial among local St. Louis-area cyclists
when he brought it up on various online forums. If you've read this
thread, you know the type of objections that people had.

3. Although the supposed "danger" of cycling keeps people off their
bikes, in this area harassment of cyclists by motorists is also a very
serious problem--it keeps AT LEAST as many cyclists off the road as
the "danger" element.

This type of harassment is rarely taken seriously by
authorities--which is one big reason it continues. The cretins know
they can continually indulge in harassment, attacks, and so on, with
no fear of consequences.

By the same token, most authorities seem to have little or no idea of
the law relating to bicycles. Bicycles are often considered some kind
of "interlopers" on the streets--something that really shouldn't
really be there, but that normally we just overlook. So if there is
an accident, it isn't investigated with the same care or insight as if
two motor vehicles collided. Why bother--it was just a cyclist, not
anyone important . . .

So there is a problem at a some point something needs to be done about
it. In our system, part of that solution is generating some attention
and media exposure. The underlying message of the ghost bikes is
"cyclists are people, too".

This isn't such a bad message, either: Drive carefully; careless
driving endangers people. Bicyclists have rights on the road just
like everyone else; they are people. Bicyclists are not some strange
and foreign "other" that is OK to harass; they are people.

So--I'm not sure I really like the idea of the "ghost bikes" either,
but have you got a better way to convey this message? If so, I'm all
ears . . .

FWIW, from my vantage point (across the state from St. Louis) the
aftermath has been FAR more positive than I would have predicted. You
can read letters to the editor in response to the story he

http://tinyurl.com/ydlf

Is he putting up mangled dummies where pedestrians have been hit, or crushed
cars where they have been car accidents? No, just bikes.

I think he was at least partly inspired by the group in New York that
was painting outlines of human forms on the spots where pedestrians
were killed:

http://www.transalt.org/press/media/...dailynews.html

--Brent
bhugh [at] mwsc.edu
www.mobikefed.org



Gluttons for punishment can find the letters here, too:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/new...d+share+the+ro

8 Dec 2003 23:24:23 -0800,
,
(Brent Hugh) wrote:

I think he was at least partly inspired by the group in New York that
was painting outlines of human forms on the spots where pedestrians
were killed:

That was proposed by the Dutch Provos in the early 1960s.

The White Victim Plan stated that anyone causing a fatal car accident
should be forced to paint the outline of their victim's body on the
pavement at the site of the accident. That way, no one could ignore
the fatalities caused by automobiles.

The White Bike Plan is the prototype for the yellow bike programs seen
in some cities today.
--
zk