ghostcycle

Great idea... it is amazing how stuff like this creates awareness. Years
ago they placed white crosses along the highway to Pullman where students
had died in auto accidents. It did wonders for creating awareness and
saved lives.

The Ghostcycles sounds like a great start and has already done wonders for
creating awareness.

"greggery peccary" <.@.> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

today i saw a few of the ghost cycles placed where cyclists had been
struck.
www.ghostcycle.org is the web site for the seattle area.
-alan

"Dan Williams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The Ghostcycles sounds like a great start and has already done wonders for
creating awareness.

Awareness? What's that?

Bob the Cow said:

"Dan Williams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The Ghostcycles sounds like a great start and has already done wonders
for creating awareness.

Awareness? What's that?

You know what it is, smartipants.

I've lived in Mexican and Puerto Rican parts of Chicago and sidewalk
shrines are very common when there is a shooting or accident. I always
stop and reflect if I have time, perhaps say a prayer for the person or
just remember how easily we can go at any time. Some people find them
morbid, these shrines, I find them an essential part of city life.

They should have a lifespan of a week or two at most, life goes on. I
don't mind the white bike thing--it's rather appropriate, but leaving the
thing there for an agenda other than to honor the fallen and for more than
a couple weeks is unnecessary and selfish.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=82623 includes a
video clip (I.E. required). The speaker in the yellow jersey is St.
Louis Regional Bicycle Federation President Bob Foster, who rides to
work past that accident site to work 3/4 miles south.

Group Remembers Bicyclist Hit And Killed Last Monday
created: 7/31/2005 9:28:51 PM updated: 8/1/2005 1:56:25 PM

By Ann Rubin

(KSDK) -- It's been a week since the accident that killed bicylist
Michael Katz in Creve Coeur. Sunday night, a group of friends held a
memorial bike ride to honor him and to bring attention to the issue of
cycling safety.

The group gathered, saddled up, and hit the road. They would follow the
path Michael Katz took last Monday, stopping at the spot where he was
killed.

Katz was a cycling enthusiast. He was on his way to synagogue Monday
morning, when a turning truck hit and killed him on Olive near
Lindbergh.

He died right beneath a street sign that said yield to bikes. His
friend Karen Karabell says, "This hurts so much because he was doing
everything right. He was in the proper lane, he was wearing a helmet."

The group is hoping this ride will raise awareness, both for bikers and
for drivers. Cyclist Bob Foster says, "Something that would benefit
everybody is if people paid a little bit more attention to what was
going on on the road."

At the scene of the accident, they left what they call the Ghost Bike.
It is a painted white reminder of what happened here and of what was
lost.

At a brief memorial, friends said a prayer, and Michael's wife Susan
spoke about her husband, "Just a wonderful family man and a fantastic
husband. And somehow I think that's all giving me strength, that we had
such a good relationship that I don't have regrets."

Still, the group says this was an accident that didn't have to happen.
Susan Katz says, "I hope some good comes out of this. I know I'm
driving more carefully, my family is, and hopefully others will as
well."

Michael Katz was laid to rest last Wednesday. The accident is still
under investigation.

KSDK

In article <[email hidden]>,

greggery peccary' .@. said:

today i saw a few of the ghost cycles placed where cyclists had been struck.
www.ghostcycle.org is the web site for the seattle area.

I clicked on the "Statistics" link. It says: "74% of accidents
resulted in physical injury and 35% resulted in damage to the
bicycle 21% resulted in both. Only 13% of the accidents
reported no damages."

But I didn't see any mention of how severe the injuries were.
If these ghostbikes are put up at the site of every incident
that had a relatively trivial outcome, it's gonna make cycling
look pretty scary. These bikes imply fatal injuries.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

According to Tom Keats <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

But I didn't see any mention of how severe the injuries were.
If these ghostbikes are put up at the site of every incident
that had a relatively trivial outcome, it's gonna make cycling
look pretty scary. These bikes imply fatal injuries.

More garbage from the priesthood of victim-advocates.

See:
http://www.livejournal.com/community/bikepirates/1365146.html

----
Lars Lehtonen

"maxo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Awareness? What's that?

You know what it is, smartipants.

Guilty as charged. It was a joke, son.

Quoted message said:

I've lived in Mexican and Puerto Rican parts of Chicago and sidewalk
shrines are very common when there is a shooting or accident. I always
stop and reflect if I have time, perhaps say a prayer for the person or
just remember how easily we can go at any time. Some people find them
morbid, these shrines, I find them an essential part of city life.

In Wisconsin, at the scene of every fatal traffic accident, someone puts up
a white cross.

In Minnesota, at the scene of every fatal traffic accident, someone puts up
a stop sign.

someone said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Awareness? What's that?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You know what it is, smartipants.

Quoted message said:

Guilty as charged. It was a joke, son.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've lived in Mexican and Puerto Rican parts of Chicago and
sidewalk shrines are very common when there is a shooting or
accident. I always stop and reflect if I have time, perhaps say a
prayer for the person or just remember how easily we can go at any
time. Some people find them morbid, these shrines, I find them an
essential part of city life.

Quoted message said:

In Wisconsin, at the scene of every fatal traffic accident, someone
puts up a white cross.

Quoted message said:

In Minnesota, at the scene of every fatal traffic accident, someone
puts up a stop sign.

and locally (in CA) most of these roadside markers are removed by road
crews after about a month. We don't need no steenkin cemeteries along
our roads. I guess it's all part of American religious fundamentalism.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

someone writes:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In Wisconsin, at the scene of every fatal traffic accident, someone
puts up a white cross.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In Minnesota, at the scene of every fatal traffic accident, someone
puts up a stop sign.

Quoted message said:

and locally (in CA) most of these roadside markers are removed by road
crews after about a month. We don't need no steenkin cemeteries along
our roads. I guess it's all part of American religious
fundamentalism.

Um, what is? Erecting 'em or removing 'em? (For someone who loves to bag
on people about clarity...)

greggery peccary' .@. said:

today i saw a few of the ghost cycles placed where cyclists had been struck.
www.ghostcycle.org is the web site for the seattle area.

Here in NYC they are put up by:
http://visualresistance.org/wordpress/?p=197
http://visualresistance.org/photos/?p=93

And here you can read about the one that a taxi cab plowed into:
http://visualresistance.org/wordpress/index.php?cat=15

Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).

Tom Keats said:

I clicked on the "Statistics" link. It says: "74% of accidents
resulted in physical injury and 35% resulted in damage to the
bicycle 21% resulted in both. Only 13% of the accidents
reported no damages."

But I didn't see any mention of how severe the injuries were.
If these ghostbikes are put up at the site of every incident
that had a relatively trivial outcome, it's gonna make cycling
look pretty scary. These bikes imply fatal injuries.

Putting a 'ghostbike' at every spot where
Billy the Yuppy bangs his knee will
terminally dilute the impact. Kind of reminds
me of that old story about the wolf and the boy.

Perhaps it is the intention of the ghostbike-puters-
uppers to let this implication stand, the suggestion
that a fatality has occurred, in order to bring
'awareness' to motorists. Maybe they haven't really
evaluated or considered the possible costs of such a
campaign.

I'd like to see/hear more just plain honesty when
discussing safety issues. (But I aint holdin my
breath, eh?)

Robert

Tom Keats said:

I clicked on the "Statistics" link. It says: "74% of accidents
resulted in physical injury and 35% resulted in damage to the
bicycle 21% resulted in both. Only 13% of the accidents
reported no damages."

But I didn't see any mention of how severe the injuries were.
If these ghostbikes are put up at the site of every incident
that had a relatively trivial outcome, it's gonna make cycling
look pretty scary. These bikes imply fatal injuries.

Tom,

I just read (via the links provided by Don Wiss)
that the NYC ghost bike is a fatalities-only deal.

"At around 1pm today, members of Visual Resistance installed a "ghost
bike" on the corner of Houston St. and Elizabeth St. in Manhattan. A
bicycle, spraypainted white, and a small stenciled plaque were attached
to a street sign as a memorial to Andrew Morgan, a 25-year old
bicyclist who was killed by a truck at the same spot on Wednesday, June
22.

"The memorial is the third of its kind. The first was installed June 15
in memory of Elizabeth Padilla, a 28-year old bicyclist killed during
her morning commute in Park Slope. The second was installed June 21 in
memory of Brandie Bailey, killed May 8 on Houston St. and Avenue A on
her way home from work."

My bike hat's off to those guys for doing it right.

R

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Putting a 'ghostbike' at every spot where
Billy the Yuppy bangs his knee will
terminally dilute the impact. Kind of reminds
me of that old story about the wolf and the boy.

Perhaps it is the intention of the ghostbike-puters-
uppers to let this implication stand, the suggestion
that a fatality has occurred, in order to bring
'awareness' to motorists. Maybe they haven't really
evaluated or considered the possible costs of such a
campaign.

I'd like to see/hear more just plain honesty when
discussing safety issues. (But I aint holdin my
breath, eh?)

The Seattle Times covered this story:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/2002415555_ghostcycle02m.html

Here are a couple of excerpts:

--------
The group mapped the locations of about 140 accidents. Then, under
cover of darkness, they placed 40 painted bikes at collision sites,
each with an ominous sign reading "A cyclist was struck here."
--------

Stories from the road

The accident submissions, posted at [8]GhostCycle.org, range from
bruises and scrapes to fractures and hospitalization.

One reads: "Car in lane to left of bike lane attempted to make a right
turn and hit me since I was beside the car. I slid over the hood of
the car, and landed in the middle of the intersection. I was unhurt
except for a sore wrist."

A second entry: "A pickup truck was [moving from] behind the bushes. I
saw it late, did a panic stop, and my front wheel locked. The bike and
I cartwheeled forward and I fell, hitting my left shoulder on the
road, breaking my clavicle. My head also hit on my left temple, which
was protected by my helmet. I nevertheless suffered a mild concussion.
Without the helmet I would have been very seriously hurt."
--------

With 40 car/bike collisions apparently randomly selected
out of 140, I wonder how many of those are really down to
under-skill and over-confidence on the parts of the riders?
In the first anecdote above it sounds to me like the cyclist
was in a bike lane and approaching an intersection, where a
car/driver beside him wanted to turn right. But maybe the
rider obstinately refused to slow up a little to let the car
merge into the bike lane to make his turn while the rider
leaves the bike lane and merges-in behind & to the left of
the right-turning car, to traverse the intersection? That's
all speculation on my part; it may also be the driver didn't
signal his intention to turn right, or the rider couldn't see
the driver's turn signal, or the driver obstinately refused
to slow down to merge into the bike lane behind the rider.
That's also speculation on my part.

The second anecdote sounds to me like the rider blithely
shot through a blind intersection with the mistaken
expectation & hope nobody else would be there, doing the
same thing.

Maybe at least some of these ghostbikes are essentially
monuments to cyclist error (and to the hazards imposed
by bike lanes.)

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Tom Keats wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

With 40 car/bike collisions apparently randomly selected
out of 140,

The cynic in me suspects that the 40 were chosen on the
basis of location, that is, the sites which have the
most visual impact.

Quoted message said:

I wonder how many of those are really down to
under-skill and over-confidence on the parts of the riders?

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Maybe at least some of these ghostbikes are essentially
monuments to cyclist error (and to the hazards imposed
by bike lanes.)

Seems like a lot of them will be more symbolic of
cyclist obliviousness than anything else.

The driving philosophy behind this campaign seems to be
that cyclists are victims. Victims of forces beyond their
control (driver non-awareness, '4000 lbs of automobile,'
etc.). Please drivers, won't you TAKE CARE OF US??
Embracing and promoting this philosophy will do
nothing to illuminate what I think is the most
important point about riding in traffic--
that cyclists need to take responsibility for their
own safety. Nobody's going to take care of you out
there. The 'victims' of some o these wrecks should
take their respective ghostbikes home and keep them
in their bedrooms. They are the ones who are truly in
need of 'awareness.' Or they could just change the
signs a bit: 'On this spot on July 25 I rode like
an idiot and got served.'

If they're going to put up 'ghostbikes' for these
dimwits, what are they going to do for Kristine Okins
(the Portland bike messenger who was mysteriously run
over by a semi not long ago)? It's not like there
aren't any places that truly deserve and cry out
to be adorned with monuments to fallen humans.

These over-reactionaries should take a clue
from their counterparts in NYC.

Robert

Quoted message said:

These over-reactionaries should take a clue
from their counterparts in NYC.

I'm with you here. Here in NYC we have over a dozen bicyclists killed each
year. So more could be put up. I believe the limitation is finding old
bicycles and the money to buy the chain. While I am active in various
bicycle activist groups here, I know little about Visual Resistance. Just
that they are more artists than bicyclists.

The people in Seattle are twisting the use of the word ghost. From m-w.com:

2 : a disembodied soul; especially : the soul of a dead person believed to
be an inhabitant of the unseen world or to appear to the living in bodily
likeness

Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Tom Keats wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

With 40 car/bike collisions apparently randomly selected
out of 140,

The cynic in me suspects that the 40 were chosen on the
basis of location, that is, the sites which have the
most visual impact.

Quoted message said:

I wonder how many of those are really down to
under-skill and over-confidence on the parts of the riders?

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Maybe at least some of these ghostbikes are essentially
monuments to cyclist error (and to the hazards imposed
by bike lanes.)

Seems like a lot of them will be more symbolic of
cyclist obliviousness than anything else.

The driving philosophy behind this campaign seems to be
that cyclists are victims. Victims of forces beyond their
control (driver non-awareness, '4000 lbs of automobile,'> etc.).

Well, I consider the driving philosophy behind this campaign
might simply be that cars suck, and they wreak too much havoc
on people -- an idea with which I have much sympathy.
But I fear cyclist/advocates overblowningly portraying cycling
as being so "deadly" might scare some people off the idea of
riding instead of driving. They might take this as proof that
if they ride in traffic, even in a heads-up and cooperative
manner, they eventually and certainly will be killed.

Actually I'm surprised the "cycling is not particularly dangerous"
Helmet Skeptics have nothing to say about this; I guess they're
too wrapped-up with talkin' about helmets. As for myself, I don't
think cycling per se is particularly dangerous either, but as a
(mostly) life-long city boy I realize being adjacent to, or among
motorized traffic regardless of one's conveyance is not without
its risks. However most of those risks are easily dealt with,
mostly by not stupidly taking chances, and just plain watching
where one is going.

Quoted message said:

Please drivers, won't you TAKE CARE OF US??

Sounds like a line from The Doors' "The End" :-)

Quoted message said:

Embracing and promoting this philosophy will do
nothing to illuminate what I think is the most
important point about riding in traffic--
that cyclists need to take responsibility for their
own safety. Nobody's going to take care of you out
there. The 'victims' of some o these wrecks should
take their respective ghostbikes home and keep them
in their bedrooms. They are the ones who are truly in
need of 'awareness.' Or they could just change the
signs a bit: 'On this spot on July 25 I rode like
an idiot and got served.'

I heartily agree.

Chances are, we'll be accused of blaming the "victims".
But gee whiz, the way I've seen a few people ride is
tantamount to someone operating a bandsaw while looking
at somebody behind them, or talking on the phone. But
they /usually/ don't get clobbered, and when they do it's
/usually/ not tragic. And I'm not talking about riders
who ignore traffic signals and signage; I'm talking about
riders who ignore traffic itself. Note I said "a few".
Most riders I see are quite competent. I guess there's
some intrinsic thing about bikes that make most riders
mindful of their limitations.

Quoted message said:

If they're going to put up 'ghostbikes' for these
dimwits, what are they going to do for Kristine Okins
(the Portland bike messenger who was mysteriously run
over by a semi not long ago)? It's not like there
aren't any places that truly deserve and cry out
to be adorned with monuments to fallen humans.

These over-reactionaries should take a clue
from their counterparts in NYC.

When the truly competent riders get clobbered (case in point:
Ken Kifer) *then* it's tragic. His still-maintained web site
is a lovely and fitting monument, with a positive message --
one that won't frighten people away from the idea of urban cycling.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Tom Keats said:

Well, I consider the driving philosophy behind this campaign
might simply be that cars suck, and they wreak too much havoc
on people -- an idea with which I have much sympathy.

I think the concept of one-person-one-car (a concept
that is here to stay, I believe, even after the oil
runs dry), is a worthy and fat target for ridicule.
(Never mind that I have a car myself, and don't plan on
donating it to NPR or anything!!) But I don't like the
melodramatic and weepy thing these Seattle ghostbikers
have going, if their agenda is really, as you say it
might be, anti-car.

Quoted message said:

But I fear cyclist/advocates overblowningly portraying cycling
as being so "deadly" might scare some people off the idea of
riding instead of driving. They might take this as proof that
if they ride in traffic, even in a heads-up and cooperative
manner, they eventually and certainly will be killed.

I'm more concerned that this particular campaign will
set off [censored] detectors on a grand scale, thus
ruining any impact that real ghostbikes or other monuments
might have had. It's disrespectful. Although the campaign
purports to spread awareness, it ends up completely
missing the point, and spreads confusion.

Quoted message said:

Actually I'm surprised the "cycling is not particularly dangerous"
Helmet Skeptics have nothing to say about this; I guess they're
too wrapped-up with talkin' about helmets. As for myself, I don't
think cycling per se is particularly dangerous either, but as a
(mostly) life-long city boy I realize being adjacent to, or among
motorized traffic regardless of one's conveyance is not without
its risks.

That's putting it somewhat mildly I would say
(considering traffic's potential to kill and maim) but
agreed.

Quoted message said:

However most of those risks are easily dealt with,
mostly by not stupidly taking chances, and just plain watching
where one is going.

Watching where you're going turns out to have all
kinds of meanings, but that's pretty much it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Please drivers, won't you TAKE CARE OF US??

Sounds like a line from The Doors' "The End" :-)

Hmm...come to think of it there could be some sort of
oedipal thing going on between car traffic and those who
call themselves vehicular cyclists...Mother, I want
to...Naahh!

Indians scattered on dawn's highway bleeding
Ghostbikes crowd the young child's fragile egg-shell mind.

Quoted message said:

Chances are, we'll be accused of blaming the "victims".
But gee whiz, the way I've seen a few people ride is
tantamount to someone operating a bandsaw while looking
at somebody behind them, or talking on the phone. But
they /usually/ don't get clobbered, and when they do it's
/usually/ not tragic. And I'm not talking about riders
who ignore traffic signals and signage; I'm talking about
riders who ignore traffic itself. <snip>

You said it all when you said it. Although traffic is
more potentially damaging than a whirring bandsaw.
Sure you could lop off an arm but then ya just tie a
tourniquet with your teeth and the good arm. No problemo.

Quoted message said:

When the truly competent riders get clobbered (case in point:
Ken Kifer) *then* it's tragic.

It's a wake up call really, for those who care to hear
it. Not many do. Cycling is not 'so deadly,' but Traffic
does have the potential to be deadly, or to ruin you
for life. That's a fact. Won't do us any good to forget
it. Those riders who forget, or who are unwilling to
consider, or who just plain don't understand the Damage
that can come from riding a bike on the street are the
ones who are most likely to experience it first-hand.
Same goes for drivers and pedestrians of course.

Quoted message said:

His still-maintained web site
is a lovely and fitting monument, with a positive message --
one that won't frighten people away from the idea of urban cycling.

And it's as informative as ever. However I wonder if
Mr. Kifer might fly down and change a few paragraphs
if he could. Just tweak it a little, you know. Hey
kids, I got killed on the road out there, be careful.

I also wonder what kind of physical monument may have
been left at the spot where he was tragically killed.

Robert