Originally Posted by kf5nd
But there must be dialogue. Is talking and listening a "silly suggestion" ? If you think so, then I feel sad for you.
In Houston, we at least have a good relationship with the City Government and the Police... we talk, they listen. They talk, we listen. We don't always agree. We don't always understand each other. But the channels are open. That's so important.
Things here ARE looking up, and I think CM is at least partly responsible for that - yesterday, for example, the 9th Precinct in Manhattan held their first-ever "Safety Day". The event was designed to serve two purposes, safety and communication; the precinct made a powerpoint presentation of safety info alongside three community speakers who also made safety presentations, and that was followed by an open forum about police procedures and cyclist needs.
Two very interesting things came out of the meeting, from my point of view. One of the community speakers gave a vehicular cycling lecture, and the NYPD officers there seemed very interested - they took a lot of notes, and it appeared that they were thinking about the issues in a vastly different way as the lecture proceeded than they had initially. My hope is that the officers present will share with others in the precinct (and eventually the rest of the city) simple ideas like the fact that riders take the lane not in order to inconvenience others, but in order to increase safety. Also during the safety talks, there were a number of times when cyclists in the crowd interrupted to clarify traffic statutes and applicable laws - a useful proof, I think, that cyclists aren't all a bunch of scofflaws, but that many of us have at least as comprehensive an understanding of our rights and responsibilities as the police have.
The other truly useful thing that came out of the event, in my view, is simply that the officers present are more aware now of the double-standard that cyclists in New York feel, and that we don't believe that we are getting the same protection under the law as is afforded to others. When I was hit by a car last year, for example, the officers responding refused to take an accident report; I asked the senior officer at the meeting yesterday what I ought to have done in order to ensure that a report was taken, and he asserted, rather strongly, that a report is ALWAYS taken in the event of a cyclist / auto accident as a matter of policy. When we assured him that in fact they are RARELY taken, as evidenced by the first-hand experiences of many of us in the room and the long-term records of the advocacy groups in attendance, he was visibly taken aback. The officers all agreed that our experiences imply a serious training oversight in the department (if not an actual bias), and, based on their reactions, I'm confident that the issue will be addressed within the department, at least in the 9th Precinct. This is serious progress! I've spent a lot of time in precinct houses in the last 18 months, having suffered a collision and two assaults, none of which I could get reports taken on, but this is the first time I've felt like the NYPD is actively interested in my safety and in ensuring that my rights under the law are protected.
As for why I think CM has played a role in getting to this point: The start point for CM is within the 9th, and those of us arrested for riding have usually been processed at that precinct house. CM has certainly raised the visibility of cyclists within those walls, and the officers there are certainly aware that schoolteachers, parents, stockbrokers, students, and all kinds of other professional, law-abiding, conscientious citizens are among the cycling community - they've MET all those people, taken their prints, had conversations with them. In addition, the neighborhood association there has been extremely active in their support of CM and by extension very vocal in demanding that cyclist concerns be addressed, as has the local neighborhood newspaper. I'm not claiming that CM as a ride has been effective, necessarily, but it is certainly my impression that CM has served as a catalyst for change in the last several months, if only because NYPD tactics have necessarily made advocates more militant in their demands for change and because a large number of cyclists who previously complained privately are now standing up to be counted. It's also true that a number of the more-visible advocacy groups that have recently organized things like memorial rides and other public events grew out of Critical Mass and continue to grow in strength and visibility as arrestees and their friends join up.
Listening and talking are indeed important - the most important, in fact. But listening and talking require that both parties be engaged and willing, and before the big CM mess of the last year, the City was simply not interested in hearing from us. There's hope now that that's finally starting to change, and we have the CM debacle to thank for that.