Crackpot Crackdown
On July 7, the morning of the London transit bombings, I flipped on the television and caught New York City police commissioner Ray Kelly talking about the homemade bombs that exploded outside of the British Consulate back in May.
The bombs, Kelly said, were planted by a bicyclist.
Bicyclist as terrorist-the moment I heard the chief say it, something clicked. For months I've been trying to understand the logic behind the NYPD's draconian crackdown on Critical Mass. So much about it doesn't make sense. To break up the ride, the NYPD deploys helicopters, blimps, mobile command centers, high-tech surveillance equipment, hundreds of overtime officers and who knows what else. It has to be incredibly expensive. And the aggressive police action creates far more trouble than just letting the ride go. The cops insist that Critical Mass is a threat to public safety. Yet back when the police facilitated the ride, cyclists rolled through town quickly and uneventfully.
Only if the police believe that cyclists are potential terrorists does the crackdown make sense. The NYPD's "Broken Windows" school of policing posits that serious crime is reduced by coming down hard on minor crimes. If the cops now view Critical Mass as a mild form of urban terrorism, then perhaps the monthly ride is a minor disruption that sets the stage for bigger crimes, like the bombing of the British Consulate, or worse.
Still We Ride, a new documentary film about the epic Critical Mass before last year's Republican National Convention, provides evidence to back up the theory. The filmmakers' long-range microphone catches police officers chatting about how the monthly ride was never a problem until "anarchists" took it over. The filmmakers also got hold of infrared surveillance footage shot by a police helicopter hovering over the East Village. The cops' high-tech camera was focused not on cyclists but on a hot-and-heavy make-out session on a nearby rooftop. The heat-sensitive camera is so powerful that you can actually see glowing footprints trailing behind the couple as they walk around barefoot. Clearly, the Critical Mass crackdown has become an opportunity for the police to test out its latest anti-terrorism gadgetry and put Homeland Security resources to work against ordinary New Yorkers.
Unfortunately, the NYPD's view and treatment of New York City bicyclists as terrorists could not be more backward. In the post-9/11 environment (and even more so post-7/7) cyclists are not the problem. If anything, they're an important part of the solution. A more bike-friendly New York City is a safer, saner and more secure city.
Let's not even discuss the fact that cyclists don't burn oil or require a vast U.S. military presence in the Middle East to keep their vehicles rolling. The security benefits of a bike-oriented city are immediate and tangible. During major urban crises, cars and transit are useless. The bicycle is the ultimate escape pod for New Yorkers who, unlike Mayor Bloomberg, don't own a helicopter or boat. During and after the September 11 attacks and the August 2003 blackout, the most effective way to get in and out of Manhattan was by bike. In London, since the July 7 bombings the number of bicycle commuters has increased dramatically. Fortunately for Londoners, their city's bike infrastructure is far more developed than New York's, and they have a viable way to keep the city moving in a time of crisis.
The next time you find the NYPD riffling through your bags as you wait to board the subway, use the moment to consider that private motor vehicles are allowed to travel through the city's vulnerable central business districts with near total unaccountability. Meanwhile, New York City's nightmare scenario is a small truck filled with radiological or biological material exploding in Midtown at lunch hour. There are two obvious things the city can do to help prevent or limit the damage from such an attack. First, create car-free spaces, 42nd Street being the obvious place to start. Second, reduce automobile traffic and monitor it more effectively by automatically tolling motorists who wish to drive through the city's most crowded, transit-rich districts, just as London is now doing with great success.
Don't get me wrong. Making New York City less car-oriented and more bike-friendly isn't necessarily going to stop determined maniacs from blowing things up. But it does provide real security benefits. And it does so while enhancing New Yorkers' health, economy and quality of life. In the last few months we've seen what happens when civil affairs become security issues. When police take over urban design, you get the desolate, fortress-like streetscape of the "Freedom Tower." When police take over transportation policy, you get the expensive, disruptive and abusive crackdown on Critical Mass. The result is not a more secure city. It is a police state.