LA Doc Guilty as Charged

[davidlee]

Thank god.
http://www.velonews.com/article/99800/dr-thompson-guilty-in-la-road-rage-trial

[tv_vt]

Yes!

[toaster]

The doctor acted with malice aforethought. His intentions were clearly to cause great bodily harm and now that should be apparent even to him.

Whatever the issues were, using a car to make someone have a serious collision is never right or excusable.

I hope Mandeville Canyon becomes a nicer place now.

[MattTuck]

Waiting for the Law & Order version inspired by true events, should be on next season.

I can hear the closing arguments now.


Would also be useful for one of those dr. shows like grey's anatomy, when they need to boot a character off the show.

[norcalbiker]

:beer: :beer: :beer:

[dd74]

It's hard for me to get around the fact that on top of everything, the man is a doctor. Doesn't his job entail healing people, not practically killing them?

[regularguy412]

It's hard for me to get around the fact that on top of everything, the man is a doctor. Doesn't his job entail healing people, not practically killing them?


Hypocratic Oath? In his case, hypocritic(al).

Mike in AR:beer:

[MilanoTom]

No bail pending sentencing - looks like he'll get a meaningful sentence, too.

[gone]

I just love this part:

Thompson's lawyer had argued that the cyclists were belligerent and may have fallen because of the inherent instability of bicycles.

I have to admit I was more than a bit skeptical that he'd receive anything more than a wrist slap when the "accident" first happened. This is one case where I'm really glad to be wrong.

[wildboar]

Now they refer to him as "a former emergency room physician."

[vqdriver]

:beer:

even with the max 5 years sentence, he'll get out early.
let's see a civil suit. as much as i hate people who sue, this is certainly not a frivolous case and warrants it. that seems to be the only way to hurt people like him.

[MattTuck]

Also, let this be an example to file a police report in the case of any aggressive action by a driver.

I think this conviction was made possible, or atleast a lot more likely, by the prosecutor's ability to rely on previous behavior to establish a pattern and really paint this guy as the scum bag he is.

[rugbysecondrow]

It's hard for me to get around the fact that on top of everything, the man is a doctor. Doesn't his job entail healing people, not practically killing them?

What I find interesting is when people so often do "good" in many aspects of their lives, but fall very short in others. Just shows that all people are broken in different ways.

I hope he gets punnished accordingly.

[rinconryder]

He will probably lose his license for life as well. I haven't seen the actual charging documents, but assault with a deadly weapon, to wit a vehicle, under Penal Code 245(a)(1) results in the permanent loss of one's license for life if found guilty. I suspect that is one of the charges in the case.
Minor relative to the time and destruction caused, but nice to know he will never operate a motor vehicle again, at least in theory he shouldn't.

[Keith A]

This is outstanding news!

[572cv]

It was the right verdict, from all that has been published. As it should be, this is a cautionary reminder to those who think that picking on a bike with a car is somehow a fair fight. At the same time, the verdict could have been different had he had a smarter attorney.... but the doctor has gone from a perp to a felon in the moment. What kind of stress must there be on an ER doc? This is a guy who cracked, big time. It is a sad tale, no matter how it is taken. I hope that the long term outcomes are good for society, because there don't appear to be winners in this particular case. My hat is off to the cyclists who stuck to their convictions, though.

[Dekonick]

Good. A shame it happened, but at least the outcome of the trial sends a message that a car is a deadly weapon. I will be curious to find out what sentence he gets...

[BumbleBeeDave]

It was the right verdict, from all that has been published. As it should be, this is a cautionary reminder to those who think that picking on a bike with a car is somehow a fair fight. At the same time, the verdict could have been different had he had a smarter attorney.... but the doctor has gone from a perp to a felon in the moment. What kind of stress must there be on an ER doc? This is a guy who cracked, big time. It is a sad tale, no matter how it is taken. I hope that the long term outcomes are good for society, because there don't appear to be winners in this particular case. My hat is off to the cyclists who stuck to their convictions, though.

No winners? Every cyclist who simply wants equal rights to the road is a winner in this case and every one from now on that comes out like this. The more publicity for this verdict, the better, because this type of deterrent is what people understand. It's unfortunate that everyone can't just be nice to each other, but that's the way it is. Slowly but surely if cases like this keep ending like this, the small percentage of arrogant, dangerous drivers who think they can get away with this type of behavior will get it through their heads that it's not acceptable. Of course there will be some who never learn, but the best thing we as cyclists can do is to stand up for our rights to the road by reporting incidents of road rage and harassment and seeing them through to their conclusions.

As for drivers who pick on cyclists, I think most of them already know it's not a fair fight. They know that a cyclist stands no chance against a car and that's why they pick on cyclists in the first place. They think they can do it, run away, and get away with it. Cases like this teach them they are wrong.

BBD

[GuyGadois]

I love it when the justice system works. I have been following this for a while and was worried when I heard it going to a jury.

:beer:

-GG-

[rcnute]

:beer:

even with the max 5 years sentence, he'll get out early.
let's see a civil suit. as much as i hate people who sue, this is certainly not a frivolous case and warrants it. that seems to be the only way to hurt people like him.

Everyone else's case is "frivolous." Except yours.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . that turned up in my search for more info on the verdict today. I wonder if the doctor still has the attitude that so obviously comes through in this story about his original arraignment? . . .

http://www.ebbc.org/?q=node/2175

BBD

[Louis]

What kind of stress must there be on an ER doc? This is a guy who cracked, big time.

"Cracked" implies a sudden, unexpected change in beharviour. The facts show that is way off base. This guy has a long and well documented history of pulling stunts like this.

He didn't crack, this was SOP.

[JD Smith]

I'm happy for the verdict, but I'm a little disappointed. I was kind of looking forward to a night of burning and looting. Oh well, I can still look forward to the World Series outcome as an excuse to brush up on my brick throwing and big screen TV hauling skills.

[Louis]

I'm happy for the verdict, but I'm a little disappointed. I was kind of looking forward to a night of burning and looting.

Have you been up Mandeville Canyon Rd lately? I heard the Homeowners Association has taken four cyclists hostage and they're threatening to cut their Achilles tendons. Burning 700c tires in the streets, shredded Lycra all over the place. Bad scene.

[Tom Byrnes]

Last week, I talked with Superior Court Judge Richard Stone, DDA Mary Stone's husband. He is a former deputy district attorney and we had been adversaries in the past. We both expressed our surprise that given the amount of incriminating evidence, including the doctor's own damaging statements, Peter Swarth never attempted to settle this matter without a trial. He never approached Mary or her bosses with a proposed disposition.

We won't know whether it was his attorney's strategy and decision, or the doctor's call, but it was obviously a mistake to not try to settle his case with a plea bargain. Throughout the trial, the doctor never appeared to be remorseful or contrite about what occurred. Instead, he appeared quite confident, like his attorney. His attitude and demeanor throughout the trial undercut his teary, emotional testimony where he claimed to be so sorry and apologetic. Obviously, the jury did not believe his testimony.

Dr. Thompson's conviction on the Mayhem charge means that he has suffered a Strike under California's Three Strike law.

His Guilty Verdicts on the seven counts can be used in a civil lawsuit. The doctor probably could have settled this case for two non-strike felonies (Assault with a Deadly Weapon - his automobile) and a "no contest" pleas, which plea could not be used as an admission of guilt or fault in a subsequent civil lawsuit. He probably would have received a suspended prison sentence, maybe a small amount of county jail time or community service and the right to "earn" reductions of his felony convictions to misdemeanors upon the completion of his probation. Ultimately, he could have had his convictions expunged if he never served any time in a state prison and remained free of other criminal matters.

Now, the doctor will be sentenced to state prison. "Mayhem is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, four, or eight years." California Penal Code Section 204. It is not a "wobbler" wherein the judge in his or her discretion can treat the conviction as a misdemeanor or a felony for sentencing purposes. Mayhem is punishable only by imprisonment in state prison.

There will be an appeal filed. Swarth has sixty days to do so after the doctor is sentenced, but will file it right after the sentencing.

The trial judge is a former deputy district attorney. I think he made sure that if he erred in his rulings, it was on the side of the defendant. The doctor will have to convince an appellate court that he did not receive a fair trial. I don't see that happening. There is overwhelming evidence to support to jury's verdict.

The doctor's road rage has cost him dearly.

[false_Aest]

Wow

Thanks for the breakdown T.B.

TFT

[Elefantino]

LA TImes story, with photo (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cyclist3-2009nov03,0,761131.story).

[JD Smith]

Have you been up Mandeville Canyon Rd lately? I heard the Homeowners Association has taken four cyclists hostage and they're threatening to cut their Achilles tendons. Burning 700c tires in the streets, shredded Lycra all over the place. Bad scene.

You can only oppress the downtrodden for so long before the wailing of their souls makes itself manifest. I'm sure a lot of great music will be born from their frustration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVgHffdUPfI

[William]

http://wishiwasfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/throw-the-book.png

[Walter]

Everyone else's case is "frivolous." Except yours.

Very well said!

[Climb01742]

sending this doctor to prison might satisfy a sense of justice but i wonder if a more useful sentence might be to serve his full sentence working in a free clinic, or homeless shelter, or aids clinic while under house arrest -- then decide, based on his behavior, whether to pull is license or not? i'm not advocating lightening his load -- given the reports, he seems worth very little mercy, if any -- but given his medical training, and the poverty in LA, might there be a outcome that could benefit at least someone?

[palincss]

Did they close Devil's Island?

[gemship]

sending this doctor to prison might satisfy a sense of justice but i wonder if a more useful sentence might be to serve his full sentence working in a free clinic, or homeless shelter, or aids clinic while under house arrest -- then decide, based on his behavior, whether to pull is license or not? i'm not advocating lightening his load -- given the reports, he seems worth very little mercy, if any -- but given his medical training, and the poverty in LA, might there be a outcome that could benefit at least someone?


yeah but everybody has to be held accountable to the same degree. Some would see it as a light sentence, heavy sentences across the land make for better deterrence.

actually the thought also occurred to me that he should lose his license to practice medicine. I believe their is good moral/conduct standard even nurses are held to to attain/maintain certification

[Ozz]

...-- but given his medical training, and the poverty in LA, might there be a outcome that could benefit at least someone?
prisons need doctors too....

[Lifelover]

From start to finish, this whole story makes me sad.

I don't think ***** like this helps us as cyclist one bit, regardless of the legal outcome.


This thread is very indicitive of the "us vs them" mentality and that will never improve our situration.

[rugbysecondrow]

From start to finish, this whole story makes me sad.

I don't think ***** like this helps us as cyclist one bit, regardless of the legal outcome.


This thread is very indicitive of the "us vs them" mentality and that will never improve our situration.


Agreed. The funny part of the Us v Them mentality is that most of "us" are drivers too. I am just going to say it, I think many cyclists are dicks. They often ride like dicks, act like dicks off the bike and have an inflated sense of entitlement and self that I think many drivers pick up on. I have a short list of people I like to ride with who share many of the same riding values I have and I also have stopped riding with people who I feel jeopardize my safety by acting like a douche bags on a bike. I don't want my riding partner participating in a incident that will end up with my head going through the rear window of a car.

Sorry, but if we are going to be critical of cars and thier actions, we should self police and be responsible for our actions as well. "Sharing" the road impies a relationship, give and take...not take, take and take some more.

Now, time for more coffee.

[William]

Agreed. The funny part of the Us v Them mentality is that most of "us" are drivers too. I am just going to say it, I think many cyclists are dicks. They often ride like dicks, act like dicks off the bike and have an inflated sense of entitlement and self that I think many drivers pick up on. I have a short list of people I like to ride with who share many of the same riding values I have and I also have stopped riding with people who I feel jeopardize my safety by acting like a douche bags on a bike. I don't want my riding partner participating in a incident that will end up with my head going through the rear window of a car.

Sorry, but if we are going to be critical of cars and thier actions, we should self police and be responsible for our actions as well. "Sharing" the road impies a relationship, give and take...not take, take and take some more.

Now, time for more coffee.

Drifting.....

I’ve said it here before, and I think you’re right.

Example: I loved living in Portland. It has a great bike culture and it’s very bike friendly by most standards. Driving around town generally pissed me off due to the high number of cyclists, messengers etc…who rode their bikes like effin dick heads. Running lights, dodging through traffic, riding the wrong direction on one way streets. If you want people, and I say people since that’s what drivers are, to take you seriously you have to follow the rules of the road. That’s what we’re asking them to do.




William

[gone]

If you want people, and I say people since that’s what drivers are, to take you seriously you have to follow the rules of the road. That’s what we’re asking them to do.
William

I hate to contribute to the drift but I couldn't agree more. Sadly, people tend to lump all of us together and use the behavior of a few morons as ammunition for why cyclists don't belong on the road or as self-justification for coming close, cutting us off, etc. In nearly every metro paper I've read on-line, when there's a story about a cyclist being killed there are invariably a huge number of responses complaining about cyclists riding 2 abreast, running stop signs, etc. In many respects we're our own worst enemy.

Having said that, being able to threaten and/or hit someone with a several thousand pound vehicle traveling at speed with impunity is just wrong. Society says you can't shoot someone just because they're being a jerk and yet hitting a cyclist (or causing them to hit you) is often treated as though they "deserved it".

[duke]

I wholeheartedly agree with you two guys. (rugby and william. There is no us versus them. I have met the enemy and he is us....
duke

[Ozz]

here you go:

[flydhest]

If you want people, and I say people since that’s what drivers are, to take you seriously you have to follow the rules of the road. That’s what we’re asking them to do.

William

I disagree. {{sidebar: I can't believe I'm disagreeing with William. Heaven help me.}}

Here's why. I don't think that there is a link between lawful and respectful road use and belligerent people's reactions to others on the road. Oh, belligerent drivers will swear up and down that the bad habits of cyclists are the reason why they don't get respect. That cyclists should all follow the same rules that cars have to follow. But, in my experience at least, that line of reasoning does not hold water. I commute every day through downtown DC. At every single light and on every single street, I see cars regularly violating the law. Running lights, speeding, driving dangerously. The aforementioned worldview, I am forced to conclude, would advocate not having any respect for cars on the road because a reasonably large fraction of drivers are effin' d-bags.

I am a big proponent of lawful respectful cycling. I practice it. On the shop rides I lead, I require it. That fact, however, never seems to stop angry drivers from getting angry at me when there was some other cyclist that did something stupid.

The insight I do agree with is that it's people who are the problem. But then, that's not likely to change.

{{sidebar: I still can't believe I disagreed with William. I'll have to keep a squirrel around for protection now.}}

[rugbysecondrow]

I disagree. {{sidebar: I can't believe I'm disagreeing with William. Heaven help me.}}

Here's why. I don't think that there is a link between lawful and respectful road use and belligerent people's reactions to others on the road. Oh, belligerent drivers will swear up and down that the bad habits of cyclists are the reason why they don't get respect. That cyclists should all follow the same rules that cars have to follow. But, in my experience at least, that line of reasoning does not hold water. I commute every day through downtown DC. At every single light and on every single street, I see cars regularly violating the law. Running lights, speeding, driving dangerously. The aforementioned worldview, I am forced to conclude, would advocate not having any respect for cars on the road because a reasonably large fraction of drivers are effin' d-bags.

I am a big proponent of lawful respectful cycling. I practice it. On the shop rides I lead, I require it. That fact, however, never seems to stop angry drivers from getting angry at me when there was some other cyclist that did something stupid.

The insight I do agree with is that it's people who are the problem. But then, that's not likely to change.

{{sidebar: I still can't believe I disagreed with William. I'll have to keep a squirrel around for protection now.}}

My opinion is different than yours, but might fill in the gaps some.

I am reading a book called , "Traffic" that discusses the impersonal way drivers behind the wheel of vehicles are viewed.

Some points:

When driving, all people tend to see "Cars" as objects and almost always ignore the person in it. They refer to them as object and act toward them as objects and not people or individuals.

People on bikes, however, were seen as people. This is good and bad.

The good is that there is a great deal of respect and deference shown towards cyclists, although we always seem to remember the scarce incidents like in LA.


Some problems,
Cyclist, on the other hand, don't view the driver behind the wheel as a "person" but completly view them soley as objects...their cars. They ride around and through them the same way they would barriers at a parking garage or any other object. The people behind the wheel take this personally because they are being hindered and disrespected not by another car or object, but rather a person on a bike. Two very different views here. I think this is why people get more pissed at people on bikes they do at people in cars...they only see the car and not the people in them (that car just cut me off, that car is going to fast, that car...).

Look at most of the "Us vs. Them" conversations, they involve Cyclists vs. Cars, Cyclist vs. SUVs.....don't they?

[rugbysecondrow]

Having said that, being able to threaten and/or hit someone with a several thousand pound vehicle traveling at speed with impunity is just wrong. Society says you can't shoot someone just because they're being a jerk and yet hitting a cyclist (or causing them to hit you) is often treated as though they "deserved it".

I don't think anybody is saying that or arguing that perspective, I certainly wouldn't say anybody deserves it.

[gone]

I don't think anybody is saying that or arguing that perspective, I certainly wouldn't say anybody deserves it.

You're right, nobody here is saying it, I wouldn't expect otherwise.

However, the law in most states is basically worthless when it comes to a car hitting a cyclist unless it can be proved (as it was in this case) that it was done deliberately. As was the case in the couple on the tandem that was hit in Helotes (thread here (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=64963&highlight=Helotes)) it is viewed as an "accident" and no charges are generally filed. Even should the local law enforcement wish to file charges, in most states the only charge that could be applied is fairly weak e.g., failure to yield, and results in a small fine.

[flydhest]

While the book might be interesting, why ought we think that what he writes is "true"? There is the age old joke that you don't learn to swear until you learn to drive. Swearing at the person who cut you off in traffic is a time-honored tradition. Why would anyone get angry with an inanimate object? I suspect that people are getting angry with the person who cut them off.

Moreover, while some cyclists ride around cars and such, cars do the same thing, and one of my favorite activities (in a fit of self satisfaction by being free on a bicycle) to watch is drivers getting pissed off with each other.

Dupont Circle in DC is a travesty of a traffic circle but is a great deal of entertainment. I will at times do an extra lap on the way home just to watch people shouting at each other in cars because they are cutting each other off. In this city, at least, it does seem to me that drivers react to other drivers, not just to their cars.


That said, even if the view in Traffic of the world were accurate, it means that the "cyclists should act like cars if they want to be treated like cars" ethos is misguided. Mr. Vanderbilt's assertions, that cars are seen as objects and cyclists as people, means that trying to equate behavior isn't valid.

I prefer to just think that people suck and be done with it.

My opinion is different than yours, but might fill in the gaps some.

I am reading a book called , "Traffic" that discusses the impersonal way drivers behind the wheel of vehicles are viewed.

[rugbysecondrow]

While the book might be interesting, why ought we think that what he writes is "true"? There is the age old joke that you don't learn to swear until you learn to drive. Swearing at the person who cut you off in traffic is a time-honored tradition. Why would anyone get angry with an inanimate object? I suspect that people are getting angry with the person who cut them off.

Moreover, while some cyclists ride around cars and such, cars do the same thing, and one of my favorite activities (in a fit of self satisfaction by being free on a bicycle) to watch is drivers getting pissed off with each other.

Dupont Circle in DC is a travesty of a traffic circle but is a great deal of entertainment. I will at times do an extra lap on the way home just to watch people shouting at each other in cars because they are cutting each other off. In this city, at least, it does seem to me that drivers react to other drivers, not just to their cars.


That said, even if the view in Traffic of the world were accurate, it means that the "cyclists should act like cars if they want to be treated like cars" ethos is misguided. Mr. Vanderbilt's assertions, that cars are seen as objects and cyclists as people, means that trying to equate behavior isn't valid.

I prefer to just think that people suck and be done with it.

Why ought we believe anything we read or hear? I am not suggesting the monetary standard be set to what he says, but it seems to makes sense.

It is the cursing that proves this objectification, not disproves it. People yell and curse often, but not at other people, but at the cars. Think about it, if there was any thought of reprecussion for cursing at somebody, would they do it? At the movie theater, grocery store...any place else where people wait in line and there is cutting, swerving etc, there is not cursing or yelling. That is because they see the person, the individual. Cars won't come kick your ass, if you call them a dick or a jerk, but a person would. I have been flipped the bird and cursed at by people that, when they had the opportunity to repeat themselves in a shopping center, opted not to.

What I take away is that cyclist can't act like cars, they are not built to function that way...it is impossible. What cyclists can do is act respectfully and communicate with the people in the cars. I know you think I am wrong, but if you read the message boards comments drivers make after many of these bike accidents, it is apparent we are doing something wrong here to create this anomosity. We can ignore it or deal with it, but you can't legislate it out of their consciousness.

It is not that they suck either as these are the some people watching our kids at daycare, fixing our pipes at home or helping to put us back together in the Emergency Room...real people

[djg]

From start to finish, this whole story makes me sad.

I don't think ***** like this helps us as cyclist one bit, regardless of the legal outcome.


This thread is very indicitive of the "us vs them" mentality and that will never improve our situration.

Well, I think that many of us are drivers as well as cyclists. This case seemed to involve something way beyond harm to cyclists caused by carelessness or even recklessness on the part of a driver. The defendant himself, at trial, said that he wanted to teach the cyclists "a lesson" -- that is, he wanted to use his car to teach other human beings, who were not protected by a car and belts and airbags, a lesson, presumably by using its mass and power to threaten them and/or hurt them physically in a way they would not forget. That intent, and his conduct, are not just the sorts of things that could, maybe, sometimes result in injuries -- they are the sorts of things that are very likely to injure people and perhaps not unlikely to cause serious physical injury (as ocurred in this case) or death.

Calibrating the law to address accidents appropriately is no easy feat -- you want to create significant incentives for people to drive with care (and to avoid driving while impaired, etc.); but you don't want draconian penalties attached to typically sensible behaviors that happen, once-in-a-while, to end badly. But this was no accident. With no animosity toward drivers generally (gee, myself, my wife, my brother, my pals . . . ) I really think that some signficant criminal penalty needs to attach to the doc's conduct because I think that the law too often excuses agressive or patently dangerous driving that actually harms a cyclist or a pedestrian as "an accident." As much as I think that the doc in question seems pretty horrible on the published descriptions of the events, I don't really take any retributive satisfaction in the idea that he might suffer if incarcerated. I do, however, take satisfaction in this as a rare signal, from the justice system to the rest of the world, that it's not acceptable to use a car as a weapon. Similarly, the civil law could send a signal and attempt -- in its own attenuated fashion -- to make the victims (a bit more) whole, and to do it out of the pockets of the one who did them intentional harm.

[flydhest]

I dunno, living in the middle of a city, I see people yelling at each other on foot on the street, person to person. If the person might be able to put a hurt on, it's done from a distance. I agree that the belief that they won't have to face retribution emboldens people's tongues, but that does not, n my view, imply that they are not swear at the person. I just can't see why you swear at an inanimate object.

With respect to what cyclists can and can't do and drivers reaction . . . I agree with you that there is an enormous amount of animosity that is created. Part of my point, though, is that regardless of how respectfully I ride, I bear at least part of the brunt of that animosity. People suck. They tend to get upset for a variety of reasons, the psychological phenomenon of attribution bias is fairly strong, it seems to me, and then lump people together. When I've had drivers yell at me and I asked why, they rant about how "all you cyclists do X, Y, and Z." The fact that I hadn't been engaged in that activity, but a cyclist they recently past had doesn't seem to matter. I am one of "them." Racist, sexist, and other bigoted mindsets work the same way. It is, to a large extent, how people are, I think.

That said, I may be overly negative. Every day, real people, in my view, do suck. That includes the people who watch kids at day care and fix pipes.

Humans are just craptastic. Look at history and what people have repeatedly done to each other.

Why ought we believe anything we read or hear? I am not suggesting the monetary standard be set to what he says, but it seems to makes sense.

It is the cursing that proves this objectification, not disproves it. People yell and curse often, but not at other people, but at the cars. Think about it, if there was any thought of reprecussion for cursing at somebody, would they do it? At the movie theater, grocery store...any place else where people wait in line and there is cutting, swerving etc, there is not cursing or yelling. That is because they see the person, the individual. Cars won't come kick your ass, if you call them a dick or a jerk, but a person would. I have been flipped the bird and cursed at by people that, when they had the opportunity to repeat themselves in a shopping center, opted not to.

What I take away is that cyclist can't act like cars, they are not built to function that way...it is impossible. What cyclists can do is act respectfully and communicate with the people in the cars. I know you think I am wrong, but if you read the message boards comments drivers make after many of these bike accidents, it is apparent we are doing something wrong here to create this anomosity. We can ignore it or deal with it, but you can't legislate it out of their consciousness.

It is not that they suck either as these are the some people watching our kids at daycare, fixing our pipes at home or helping to put us back together in the Emergency Room...real people

[JMerring]

Humans are just craptastic. Look at history and what people have repeatedly done to each other.

totally agree. on an observational note, and having spent a significant amount of time living in the us and abroad, i gotta say that the people suckiness factor (in terms of intolerance, aggression, lack of respect for humans as humans, sense of entitlement, self-righteousness) is higher in the good old us of a than anywhere else i have lived. i admit this is a gross generalization but the state of this uncivil society is really getting me down. maybe it's cos i'm not a 'rugged individualist'. or maybe i'm just an obama-loving left-leaning 'socialist' liberal. either way, the fact that i have now spent close to 20 years here and i'm now contemplating a return to my native south africa in spite of all its problems speaks volumes (to me at least) about the state of america.

bash me all you will. this is a great country. there is a good deal that i like about it and much that i am grateful for. at the same time, i cannot help but think that america's best days are behind it and that america's downfall is nigh. not because of an ascendent china or fundamentalist islam or even radical republicans. but rather because america, it would seem, is corrupt and rotten from within, and unless and until there is a sea change in the manner in which the people here start treating each other, i struggle to see a different result.

a bit harsh? perhaps, but it's my opinion and i'm sticking to it.

[malcolm]

totally agree. on an observational note, and having spent a significant amount of time living in the us and abroad, i gotta say that the people suckiness factor (in terms of intolerance, aggression, lack of respect for humans as humans, sense of entitlement, self-righteousness) is higher in the good old us of a than anywhere else i have lived. i admit this is a gross generalization but the state of this uncivil society is really getting me down. maybe it's cos i'm not a 'rugged individualist'. or maybe i'm just an obama-loving left-leaning 'socialist' liberal. either way, the fact that i have now spent close to 20 years here and i'm now contemplating a return to my native south africa in spite of all its problems speaks volumes (to me at least) about the state of america.

bash me all you will. this is a great country. there is a good deal that i like about it and much that i am grateful for. at the same time, i cannot help but think that america's best days are behind it and that america's downfall is nigh. not because of an ascendent china or fundamentalist islam or even radical republicans. but rather because america, it would seem, is corrupt and rotten from within, and unless and until there is a sea change in the manner in which the people here start treating each other, i struggle to see a different result.

a bit harsh? perhaps, but it's my opinion and i'm sticking to it.


well don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out!!! Joking

I agree with some of what you are saying. We have a certain sense of entitlement. I think the same thing happens with all world powers. It is easy to be a relaxed government when you know someone else will protect you.
I like Costa Rica, years ago they disbanded their millitary because they knew the US would protect them, it is a great place 3rd worldish but very literate.

I hope you are wrong and instead of decline we have maybe a period of downturn with some recovery of our old self.

[BumbleBeeDave]

bash me all you will. this is a great country. there is a good deal that i like about it and much that i am grateful for. at the same time, i cannot help but think that america's best days are behind it and that america's downfall is nigh. not because of an ascendent china or fundamentalist islam or even radical republicans. but rather because america, it would seem, is corrupt and rotten from within, and unless and until there is a sea change in the manner in which the people here start treating each other, i struggle to see a different result.

I have a feeling of hopelessness because I see the same exact thing you are talking about. Nothing is important except making more profit and getting more "toys" and the prevailing attitude seems to be "To hell with the rest of the world and everybody in it was long as I've got MINE!" There seems to be very littls regard any more for the Golden Rule or the "common good" and what's worst of all is that no matter how much I try to practice courtesy and civil behavior myself, I don't feel like I have any real control to do anything about the slide.

BBD

[rugbysecondrow]

I dunno, living in the middle of a city, I see people yelling at each other on foot on the street, person to person.

That said, I may be overly negative. Every day, real people, in my view, do suck. That includes the people who watch kids at day care and fix pipes.

Humans are just craptastic. Look at history and what people have repeatedly done to each other.

Come on, I work and recreate in DC also and I don't see people yelling an cursing at each other. Sure, it is more acceptable in some places, but in most of the country it is unacceptable.

That said, maybe you are overly negative and you see the world from that viewpoint. That is cool if it works for you, I just tend not to think people suck, I actually think most people are decent and not craptastic.

What an unhappy way to interact with your world, thinking that poorly of people?

[rugbysecondrow]

totally agree. on an observational note, and having spent a significant amount of time living in the us and abroad, i gotta say that the people suckiness factor (in terms of intolerance, aggression, lack of respect for humans as humans, sense of entitlement, self-righteousness) is higher in the good old us of a than anywhere else i have lived. i admit this is a gross generalization but the state of this uncivil society is really getting me down. maybe it's cos i'm not a 'rugged individualist'. or maybe i'm just an obama-loving left-leaning 'socialist' liberal. either way, the fact that i have now spent close to 20 years here and i'm now contemplating a return to my native south africa in spite of all its problems speaks volumes (to me at least) about the state of america.

bash me all you will. this is a great country. there is a good deal that i like about it and much that i am grateful for. at the same time, i cannot help but think that america's best days are behind it and that america's downfall is nigh. not because of an ascendent china or fundamentalist islam or even radical republicans. but rather because america, it would seem, is corrupt and rotten from within, and unless and until there is a sea change in the manner in which the people here start treating each other, i struggle to see a different result.

a bit harsh? perhaps, but it's my opinion and i'm sticking to it.

So why stay? Not to sound flip about it, but if you are sticking guns, don't be wishy washy about it.

As an aside, I have always laughed when people speak about America as if it is one place, New York, DC, LA, Texas etc...it is just so stupid.

America is HUGE geographically and very diverse in attitude, culture, interactions. And to say that Americans suck(i.e. us on the board here for example) or America is corrupt from the within...that is plain silly because there is no core. There is no center. There is no middle. You can't point to it. The closest thing you get would be the American people, and I think many, including myself, would argue that we would take the bad with the good any day and that the people are a strength, not a detriment to our success.

[JMerring]

So why stay? Not to sound flip about it, but if you are sticking guns, don't be wishy washy about it.

but for the violence in south africa, i'd be there in a second. with a 1 year old and a 4 year old, the decision isn't an easy one.

As an aside, I have always laughed when people speak about America as if it is one place, New York, DC, LA, Texas etc...it is just so stupid.

America is HUGE geographically and very diverse in attitude, culture, interactions. And to say that Americans suck(i.e. us on the board here for example) or America is corrupt from the within...that is plain silly because there is no core. There is no center. There is no middle. You can't point to it. The closest thing you get would be the American people, and I think many, including myself, would argue that we would take the bad with the good any day and that the people are a strength, not a detriment to our success.

i think that is only partially true. unlike europe, for example, which has a common economic union but is comprised of separate and distinct nation-states with vastly different cultures, languages and histories (as between them), america is a single country with only 2 political parties. americans have a common language and history, and while there is significant diversity within america, there is an equally significant shared experience which permits certain generalizations to be made, and for such generalizations to be true. i don't think you can argue that america is characterized by an overwhelming emphasis on the individual rather than the community, and this over-arching philosophy is in sharp contrast to most of the rest of the world.

[JMerring]

well don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out!!! Joking

i know you are kidding but be careful what you wish for - you'll need my tax $$ to pay for obamacare.

I hope you are wrong and instead of decline we have maybe a period of downturn with some recovery of our old self.

i hope i'm wrong too. sort of - that 'old self' needs to change a bit.

[benb]

Some problems,
Cyclist, on the other hand, don't view the driver behind the wheel as a "person" but completly view them soley as objects...their cars. They ride around and through them the same way they would barriers at a parking garage or any other object. The people behind the wheel take this personally because they are being hindered and disrespected not by another car or object, but rather a person on a bike.

This is a very car-centric/driver-centric way of looking at things.

If you're getting annoyed because I'm riding my bike past your car as if you're an obstacle, it's because you're stopped or being greatly held up by other cars. If the other cars weren't making your life difficult you'd be zooming by the cyclist. But the car-centric worldview makes it really hard to accept the fact that cars are what hold you up, and it somehow gets twisted around in small minds to be the cyclist/pedestrian's fault. Too many drivers just can't accept that if the world was Pixars "Cars" and there were no pedestrians or bicyclists, they would still be stuck going nowhere fast anytime they go into a high traffic area.

I have a really hard time getting annoyed with cyclists who ride like *sses. Yah I point them out to my wife as idiots, but I don't get steamed, they certainly don't hold me up at all.

[AndreS]

I disagree. {{sidebar: I can't believe I'm disagreeing with William. Heaven help me.}}

Here's why. I don't think that there is a link between lawful and respectful road use and belligerent people's reactions to others on the road. Oh, belligerent drivers will swear up and down that the bad habits of cyclists are the reason why they don't get respect. That cyclists should all follow the same rules that cars have to follow. But, in my experience at least, that line of reasoning does not hold water. I commute every day through downtown DC. At every single light and on every single street, I see cars regularly violating the law. Running lights, speeding, driving dangerously. The aforementioned worldview, I am forced to conclude, would advocate not having any respect for cars on the road because a reasonably large fraction of drivers are effin' d-bags.

I am a big proponent of lawful respectful cycling. I practice it. On the shop rides I lead, I require it. That fact, however, never seems to stop angry drivers from getting angry at me when there was some other cyclist that did something stupid.

The insight I do agree with is that it's people who are the problem. But then, that's not likely to change.

{{sidebar: I still can't believe I disagreed with William. I'll have to keep a squirrel around for protection now.}}

I agree with this. However, it isn't the belligerent (i.e. incorrigible) people that I, personally, hope to influence by acting respectfully while riding (I can't speak for William). It is the normal, everyday people who comprise the vast majority and who could potentially sit on a jury or otherwise judge the actions of a driver and myself should an accident occur. And, who also could potentially be voting on initiatives to limit or ban cycling on public roads. I see no point in acting in such a way as to antagonize people who are potentially sympathetic, or at worst neutral, to bicycles sharing the road.

We have a public image problem that we have, by and large, created ourselves. We can't avoid our responsibility for improving our image by saying that changing our behavior will not impress every single driver. We certainly can't excuse our behavior by using the juvenile "drivers do it too" argument.




-------------------

[zap]

snipped


I know you think I am wrong, but if you read the message boards comments drivers make after many of these bike accidents, it is apparent we are doing something wrong here to create this anomosity. We can ignore it or deal with it, but you can't legislate it out of their consciousness.



Yes, we (cyclists) are doing something wrong. That cyclists exist at all and ride on roads is enough to upset some.

Stricter motoring laws need to be passed in order to reduce automobile related cycling injuries/deaths. One can legislate respect for cyclists if fines are severe enough.

[Lifelover]

The primary reason that roadways were constructed is to provide a reasonable means of transportion. As road cyclist (commuters excepted) we want to use these publis roads as our playground.

Swoop talks about large group rides that take place on this Califorinia road that effectively turn into a race. Are any of you willing to accept a few hundred drivers getting togeather and using public roads to race on?

The vast majority of us do not want equal rights on the road. We want to take something that was purpose built and use it for fun. Me included.

Every cycling forum on the internet is buzzing with joy over this trail as if it was their kid that was hit. Every single day some A-hole uses a car as a weapon but we only care when the "victim" is a cyclist. Pretty prejuduce view in my book.

P.S. If you exclude cyclist and locals, there probably aren't 100 people nation wide that know or care anything about this case. It's outcome is meaningless.

[Lifelover]

snipped



Yes, we (cyclists) are doing something wrong. That cyclists exist at all and ride on roads is enough to upset some.

Stricter motoring laws need to be passed in order to reduce automobile related cycling injuries/deaths. One can legislate respect for cyclists if fines are severe enough.


What about stricter laws applied to cyclist. I know that I run stop signs and lights everytime I ride that I would never run in a car. Me and my friends often turn portions of our rides into races. Every group of cyclist you see is riding within inches of each other. Do you want cars doing that?

Becareful what you ask for. You might find yourself with no place to ride.

[flydhest]

I suppose it depends on where you work and . . . recreate. And when. Come to U Street at 3 am. Eckington at almost any time of day. Ten years ago when I moved to Mt. Pleasant, walking down Mt. Pleasant Street was an "interesting" experience. Columbia Heights remains so.

People definitely swear at people in person. As I noted, a sense that one will not get retribution also encourages it. Not saying that it is the local past time or anything, but it most certainly happens.

If most people were decent, however, why would they have accepted slavery and segregation for so long? If most people are decent, why is poverty such an insoluble issue? Why has religion (of all stripes) caused mass killing and war? Whence fascism if not from regular old people? Across cultures, countries, and centuries.

Yeah, people are just dandy.

As for my outlook . . .
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE5A207W20091103

Come on, I work and recreate in DC also and I don't see people yelling an cursing at each other. Sure, it is more acceptable in some places, but in most of the country it is unacceptable.

That said, maybe you are overly negative and you see the world from that viewpoint. That is cool if it works for you, I just tend not to think people suck, I actually think most people are decent and not craptastic.

What an unhappy way to interact with your world, thinking that poorly of people?

[zap]

What about stricter laws applied to cyclist. I know that I run stop signs and lights everytime I ride that I would never run in a car. Me and my friends often turn portions of our rides into races. Every group of cyclist you see is riding within inches of each other. Do you want cars doing that?

Becareful what you ask for. You might find yourself with no place to ride.

I guess you don't drive in rush hour traffic.

But really, this is silly. Take the time to read the paper I posted a month or two ago comparing education and laws in Germany and The Netherlands to the US and it's possible impact on cycling related injuries/deaths.

[flydhest]

So, I think we are largely in agreement. An exception is that the image problem, such as it is, is the product of poor behavior on the part of some cyclists, but very much exacerbated by people being angry and finding a place to direct that anger.

I was not trying to excuse cyclists for bad behavior because car drivers do it. My point with that was to point out the inconsistency and thus the likely lack of validity to the notion that it is cyclists breaking of the law that causes people to think that cyclists shouldn't be on the road. Car drivers break the law with impunity and yet there isn't a hue and cry that they be banned from streets. There must be something else going on. At this point, someone will be stewing and wanting to shout, "but the roads were made for the cars," which is sort of what lifelover said. The true (but nevertheless tongue-in-cheek) rejoinder is that when roads were first paved in this country, it was a cycling group that pushed for it. The motorists at the time were largely indifferent. The sincere response, however, is evident in the "the roads were made for cars" sentiment. I don't think that is particularly relevant, moreover, I know what the income distribution looks like in this country, so I know that my taxes are far, far greater than the average motorist, so I pay for it, my car registration fees also pay for the roads, so . .. basically, it gets back, at least in part, to cyclists some how don't have the same right to the road. I find that an unacceptable view.

I agree wholeheartedly, however, that riding like a jerk will make things worse than they are. As I said, I am a proponent of lawful, respectful cycling and force those on the rides I lead to do the same. I don't think it helps much, but it's the right thing to do, so I do it.


We have a public image problem that we have, by and large, created ourselves. We can't avoid our responsibility for improving our image by saying that changing our behavior will not impress every single driver. We certainly can't excuse our behavior by using the juvenile "drivers do it too" argument.
-------------------

[rugbysecondrow]

I suppose it depends on where you work and . . . recreate. And when. Come to U Street at 3 am. Eckington at almost any time of day. Ten years ago when I moved to Mt. Pleasant, walking down Mt. Pleasant Street was an "interesting" experience. Columbia Heights remains so.

People definitely swear at people in person. As I noted, a sense that one will not get retribution also encourages it. Not saying that it is the local past time or anything, but it most certainly happens.

If most people were decent, however, why would they have accepted slavery and segregation for so long? If most people are decent, why is poverty such an insoluble issue? Why has religion (of all stripes) caused mass killing and war? Whence fascism if not from regular old people? Across cultures, countries, and centuries.

Yeah, people are just dandy.

As for my outlook . . .
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE5A207W20091103

I don't know if I would take pride in being a sad and angry, but informed person. What good is information or wisdom if you are too angry or sad to dispense it or act on it properly, but that is for another thread.

The other answer, people are fallable and imperfect. Also, as said better than me, "No matter how much sin crept in, there was always more grace" Romans 5:20. You can highlight all the bad things you want, and it will never outweigh the good.

[Louis]

"No matter how much sin crept in, there was always more grace"

So what exactly is the control volume over which this statement is being applied?

[djg]

If most people were decent, however, why would they have accepted slavery and segregation for so long? If most people are decent, why is poverty such an insoluble issue? Why has religion (of all stripes) caused mass killing and war? Whence fascism if not from regular old people? Across cultures, countries, and centuries.

Yeah, people are just dandy.



Fly buddy, isn't it possible that we're fundamentally decent, but stupid, gullible, and unstable?

See, your latent classicism posits perfect rationality and information, stable preferences, linear blah, blah, etc., and then looks for preferences (in this case, the suffering of others) to explain observed behavior (in this case, cruel and horrible). But stick my head inside an annular magnet and bundle the pictures with my stupid, gullible, and unstable hypothesis and we are cooking behavioral economics . . . with gas.

Just trying to add value, comme toujours.

[Charles M]

This is in bad taste.



Here's to him getting "rear ended" again...

[jbrainin]

This is in bad taste.



Here's to him getting "rear ended" again...

Yep, this thread can now be considered complete!

[Dekonick]

This is in bad taste.



Here's to him getting "rear ended" again...

I laughed my ass off.... wonder if he will laugh his ass off... :p

[mikki]

What I find interesting is when people so often do "good" in many aspects of their lives, but fall very short in others. Just shows that all people are broken in different ways.

I hope he gets punnished accordingly.

I loved this comment. I too think we are ALL flawed in some ways and outstandingly good in others (Michael Jackson for another example. FYI: his "This is it" documentary is beyond awesome).

Alot of cyclists outside the courtroom were giving high fives and hugging when the announcement of the verdict came down....WHOO HOO. I'm not usually happy with what goes on here in southern California, but today I am!!

[flydhest]

Dan,
Possible, but not likely, in my view. That said, your post was worth reading about three or four times. We need to ride together again.

"Latent classicism" I love it. I feel just a bit dirty, but in a good way.

I can't tell if I should hope you think I'm a Bayesian or not.

Fly buddy, isn't it possible that we're fundamentally decent, but stupid, gullible, and unstable?

See, your latent classicism posits perfect rationality and information, stable preferences, linear blah, blah, etc., and then looks for preferences (in this case, the suffering of others) to explain observed behavior (in this case, cruel and horrible). But stick my head inside an annular magnet and bundle the pictures with my stupid, gullible, and unstable hypothesis and we are cooking behavioral economics . . . with gas.

Just trying to add value, comme toujours.

[djg]

Dan,
Possible, but not likely, in my view. That said, your post was worth reading about three or four times. We need to ride together again.

"Latent classicism" I love it. I feel just a bit dirty, but in a good way.

I can't tell if I should hope you think I'm a Bayesian or not.

If you can't tell, I probably can't ask.

Definitely on the ride together thing, and with tubular tires we don't need to worry about base rate.