Born to Ride....Victoriously

Well, I figure I better continue about day 3 and 4 at the Great Lakes Police Motorcycle Competition to follow up the last blog post.

Day 3 was more of the basics.

Look and steer where you want to go.  I still found myself every once and a while looking at the obstacles that I was trying to avoid and sure enough I would hit them. 

When riding a motorcycle or a bicycle, driving a car or even just while walking, you need to look where you want to go.  In my time a s a police officer working traffic I used to be amazed when I would roll up on a collision scene where a single motor vehicle hit a pole or a tree or even a parked car.  To the right or left of the collision scene would be wide open space, but the vehicle would hit the only object around.

The reason is pretty obvious.  The operator was looking directly at the object even though that is what they were trying to avoid.  In some ways, this is natural.  The object represents the threat and therefore we fixate on it.  Turn your eyes to the open space and steer towards the space...not the object.

When you walk through a door way, you don't look at the jams on each side...you look and walk through the open space.

Back to the training seminar....When I would use the proper riding principals, brake, steer, accelerate, shift gears, look, use proper seating position all to their optimum I never had a problem.

By the end of day three, I was feeling confident and ready to compete the next day!

Day 4.

Fantastic!!! I went into the competition hoping to be competitive and ride to the best of my ability.  I gave up a few years ago when I left the motor unit of ever challenging for top riding honours.

Looking at the cone...guess what I hit

I took all the basics and put them together at the right time to be competitive.  If it wasn't for using the basics and reminding myself, "Do the simple things right", I might have had a bad day, but because I focused on the basics, I actually came off looking like I knew what I was doing.

Most importantly, the team of five Toronto Police Officer that attended the event all concentrated on the basics and we won the Team Competition.  Here is the break down of it all.

For the published version of the following article, click here.
(From the Toronto Police Web Story)

Born to Ride...Victoriously
Motorcycle riding is a skill you never lose – just as long as you’re up to speed with the latest training techniques.


The Toronto Police Service proved just that, as their five-member team, all of whom no longer perform regular bike duties, captured the individual and team titles at the recent Great Lakes Police Motorcycle Training Seminar in Cambridge, Ontario.

A total of 70 riders, from police services across the continent, took part in the four-day event designed to challenge officers on various theoretical and practical information and to improve their riding skills.

The training courses mirror real-life events and obstacles that police motorcycle officers could be faced with on the job.

For the second time in the event’s 13-year history, S/Sgt Andy Norrie won the individual award. He was also second in the challenge ride, third in the slow ride and fourth in the smart-ride competitions.

“I am pleased to achieve an individual award, but I am more thrilled that the TPS contingent won first place in the team event,” he said.

“This achievement continues to demonstrate that the TPS is a world leader in policing and the vital role that teamwork plays in our success.”

The rest of the team was made up of Sgts. Tim Burrows and Don White, Const. Pekka Jokiniemi and Auxiliary officer Mark Webber.

Jokiniemi, who works out of the Transit Patrol Unit, won the expert division non-fairing skills competition while Burrows came out on top in the challenge and partner-ride events. He also came in second in the last rider standing contest and fourth and fifth in smart and slow-ride competitions.

White finished fourth in the challenge ride and fifth in the fairing skills (expert division) competition.

For a complete run down of how all the competitors did, click this link


For more on the event there are some great YouTube vids...use 2011 GLPMTS or GLPMTS as your search term.

Expert Motorcycle Riding Begins with the Basics

Back when I was a motor officer for Traffic Services, I and many of my colleagues would participate in training seminars as often as we could to hone our skills, learn new tactics and enjoy the camaraderie of spending time with other motorcycle officers from around North America.

I've never won an overall competition award, but I have won many individual awards for skills, slow riding, partner riding and blind course challenges.  I have been an instructor for the Toronto Police and a signing authority with the Ministry of Transportation, so I can walk with a little swagger when I attend these events...but I don't.

This year's Great Lakes Police Motorcycle Training Seminar reminds me why, even with a lot of experience and hardware under my belt, a motorcycle is machine that will remind you very quickly who is in charge.

Day 1.
First time on the motorcycle since my spring re-qualification to operate a Toronto Police Motorcycle.  I broke into my usual pre-competition routine.  Bike inspection: fluids, cables, connectors, equipment, signals, lights, air pressures, tire condition.  That resulted in some adjustments and repairs.  Then a stationary brake test, not much good trying to go if you can't stop! Start it up and roll on to about 20k, then another brake test.  Go again to about 50k and a threshold brake test, with a collision avoidance move.  Now I was sure that I had a good safe ride; now warm ups.
I like to do circles, tight ones! Left and right, warm up the steering head and get used to leaning the bike over.

Ready to go, ride over to the skills courses and shut the bike down.  Time for a little walking.  I like to walk the track to see the course of travel and visualize the lines I need to travel to ensure getting through a sea of cones without hitting any.

Back on the bike, start it up and head to the first exercise.  I chose a simple four turn patter, easy enough build my confidence and get ready for the rest.  Through the entry gates and position myself for the first turn. I adjusted my speed, set my line and absolutely hit every cone possible!!
I made a big mistake!! I looked at the pylons.  Even with all my experience, I made a big mistake by looking at the obstacle I wanted to avoid.
Bike - 1 : Me - 0

Safety Tip: Where your eyes go, you go.  Look where you want to go and steer there.

Once I had that reminder under my belt, I was ready to try again. (Thanks to the "cone crew" volunteers who were kind enough to re-set the pylons).

I had a couple hours of getting used to riding for gold again and felt way better! Enter cocky and confident...not good on a motorcycle.

I was halfway through a tough course and was getting aggressive to really turn the bike on a dime.  (Uhm, 800 pound motorcycles don't turn on dimes).  I cranked the handle bars, started the turn and put in a little back brake.  Enter physics and gravity.  The loss of my momentum coupled with the turn steering added up to a loss of balance.  I slammed my size 12 foot into the ground to pop the bike back upright, gave the motor a little more gas to work with, got off the brake and felt the initial shock travel from my foot, through my leg, into my spine and finishing in my neck.  800 pound motorcycles also don't pop back up by a foot slamming into the ground.
Bike - 2: Me - 0

Safety Tip: When riding a motorcycle or bicycle you can't eliminate momentum while turning tight other wise Sir Isaac Newton will stop to say hello.

Well, all of that behind me and my ego in check again I was ready to ride.  So into the the course that I have been having great rides in all day.  Time to go fast!!

I got into the exercise and got a little off my choice of riding line so to make up for it, I had to turn hard, power through the turn and then brake hard to set up for the next turn.  Can  you see it coming?

That's right sports fans...harsh on the controls and trying to utilize multiple inputs at the same time.  Hello sea of cones and more work for the cone crew.  I was not smooth.  I was anything but smooth and I (the cones) paid for it.
Bike - 3: Me - 0

Safety Tip: Smooth inputs are always required.  Smooth is fast, sloppy is slow.  If you are using too much of any one input (steering, braking or accelerator) you are using up the availability of the others.

The rest of the day went really good.  Cobwebs gone, rust shaken off and reminders that if I am not in control of the bike, it's in control of the results.I felt really good, once I went back to the basics.

Tips:
Always inspect your equipment
Test your brakes
Warm up
Look and steer where you want to go
Maintain power to the rear wheel
Balanced inputs are smooth
Smooth is control

Day 2
Same start with inspection, testing and warm ups.

Into the cones.

Using everything that I had reminded myself of yesterday, I had a great day of riding the cones.

First competition: Last rider standing

This is a chess game.  Two riders line up on the outside of a large circle that has obstacles in it (hockey pucks, hard rubber balls and small pylons).  The idea is to force the other rider to hit an obstacle or ride out of bounds.  Essentially, plan your route not to hit anything and cause your opponent to hit something by planning their route for them.

It combines every skill you can think of. Steering, slow riding, quick acceleration, sudden stops and route planning.



That was a recap of the first two days from my perspective.

If you want to get your own look at it, head down the 401 to Conestoga College in Kitchener.  (Exit at Homer Watson Blvd, go north and take the first right.  You'll see it on your right hand side.

Click this link and you can see the schedule and all the events.

Distracted Driving - Happy Valentines Day

Monday February 14th...HAPPY VALENTINES DAY!

I really hope you have taken the time to tell the people in your life how much they mean to you and how much you appreciate them.  After all, Valentines Day is the day to do it.  In reality, if someone means something special to you....you should tell them every chance you can.

Now, I'm not a specialist in relationships, psychology, sociology or anything like that, so I won't continue on the "tell them you love them" rant.  I will say, there is a really good reason that I'm suggesting it though.  There is a significant chance, it could be the last time you ever see them alive.

Do you have any idea how many people around us are texting, talking emailing, reading, eating or doing any number of "ing" things while they are driv-ing?

I see it everyday driving around...people using a device that has nothing to so with the task of driving a car.  Call it what you want; distracted, multi-tasked, inattentive, ignorant, unsafe, uncalled for...just don't call it safe or acceptable.  And I'm not the only one who sees it.  You see it too.  You probably complain about it and look at others with disgust and contempt when you see it.

Then you hope like crazy no one sees you when you take that 'important call'.  You hold your phone strategically in your lap so you can glance at the screen when the 'life and death' text message comes in.  You justify that there is an incredible value to the email that you have been waiting for...so much value you read it while travelling 120 km/h...that email has more value than your life, my life, or the lives of everyone else around you.

Since February 1, 2010, Ontario Police have been able to lay charges for distracted driving.  In Toronto that has meant 16,708 charges in one year.  (Feb 1, 2010 to Feb 1, 2011)

According to studies that have been done, a driver who is texting increases the chance of being in a crash 23 X.  A driver who is talking increases their risk 4 X.

So, my suggestion for Valentines Day this year along with every day leading up to it and everyday after it...tell the people that are special in your lives how much they mean to you.  With a lot of people around you risking your life, its only a matter of time before the odds catch up to you.

If you are one of the people who are driving distracted...then hopefully when you crash it will only be minor.  Could you imagine how you would feel the rest of your life if you were responsible for killing someone on the most romantic day of the year?

Take a few minutes to watch this video about the REALITY of distracted driving.

Feel free to day to take the No Phone Zone Pledge.

Winter Driving Tips from Toronto Police

Special thanks to my partner, Hugh Smith for compiling the information contained in this press release.
If you have any other safe driving tips for winter, please add them in the comments section.



Following too close!

Winter driving tips
Toronto Police Service

Broadcast time:  2:14 PM

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Traffic services

416 808 1900

This will be the first Major winter storm of the season for the Toronto area. The heavy snowfall and blowing snow may cause whiteout conditions making for extremely hazardous driving conditions.

The public should be prepared to change plans accordingly to avoid unnecessary travel during the storm.

To ensure you are ready for the rest of the winter season, here are some reminders from the Toronto Police Service.

Driving – avoid any unnecessary trips.

• Slow down and leave more space; driving slower allows more time for reaction and reduces stopping distances.
• Look well beyond where you are travelling, and utilize your mirrors to be aware of your surroundings and other traffic.
• Try to identify possible hazards well in advance.
• Drive within your ability, as well as the vehicles limits and the equipment you have for the conditions.
• Continually evaluate the need for driving, changing environmental conditions and road conditions.
• You should avoid driving while wearing heavy boots, gloves and cumbersome coats. Carry these items with you. The size of these items can hinder your ability to feel the controls and limit your movement.

Equipment

• Tires: whether you are opting for winter, snow or all-season tires, ensure they are in good condition and are properly inflated.
• Battery: have your vehicle's electrical system and battery level checked to ensure adequate cold weather starts.
• Wipers: change worn or broken blades.
• Washer fluid: reservoirs should be filled, and carry an extra container of fluid.
• Booster cables: a set of cables is great insurance to help not only yourself, but others.
• Snow brush/scraper: a long-handled brush, scraper or a broom, are essential for clearing your entire vehicle of snow and ice.

Extras:

• Pack a survival kit for the winter driving season
• Include food, water, blankets, candles, lighter/matches, winter boots, gloves, and hats.

Traffic Services is dedicated to ensuring the safe and orderly movement of traffic within the City of Toronto. Stay informed with what’s happening at Traffic Services by following us on Twitter (TrafficServices), and Facebook (Toronto Police – Traffic Services), and the Blog.

Constable Hugh Smith, Traffic Services

Safety Features on Vehicles

Last Friday I asked for your input on Twitter and Facebook the following question.

In total there were 21 different responses.  That’s amazing.  What is even more amazing is that the vast majority of the safety features that you brought up have been added to vehicle design in the last generation or so.

When I look at the list that you put together it has become clear that the changes to the design of vehicles have come at a heavy price…the multiple deaths of people both inside and outside the vehicle.

It has been because of those deaths that many of the advancements in vehicle design have come to be.

Here is the complete list:

Tires

Seatbelts

Collision detection radar

Headlights

Taillights

Signals

Airbags

Anti lock brakes

Electronic stability control / traction control

Dynamic head restraints

Crumple zones

Energy absorbing materials

Brakes

Child safety seats

Horn

Side impact beams

Windows

Mirrors

Back up sensors

Child locks

The number one answer given was seatbelts followed in order by, airbags, brakes, headlights and tires.

I’m going to focus on a few of the items that you are in complete control of.  You can’t do much about crumple zones, side impact beams or energy absorbing materials.  For those, we should thank the manufacturers for placing those items into the design of vehicles

Seatbelts – 1976 it became mandatory for the use of seatbelts.  Since that time deaths have been decreasing. There is no arguing their importance.  Still some people don’t wear them.

Anti-lock brakes / Brakes – These are a given.  But so many people rely on them alone for getting them out of trouble.  Proper following distance will extend the life of your brakes.

Lights / Signals– Daytime running lights were a great addition to the safety features of lighting. Most systems only turn on the headlights though and don’t activate the taillights in inclement weather conditions.  Make sure you flip your entire system on for best visibility.  Signaling (including the horn) is the only way you can communicate with the outside word of what your intentions are.  We get along on the roads so much better when we all know what is going on with each other.

Tires – Most people have no idea how small the area of contact is that attaches your vehicle to the road.  Making sure that your tires are in great condition, at the proper pressure and have adequate tread depth is so important.

Everything in the list that you all added are all great safety features.  Here is the last one that I will talk about…the driver.

A few of you mentioned the driver as a present safety feature.  In my humble opinion, this is the most important safety feature.  It doesn’t matter what safety equipment you have.  How much your car cost or how incredible the features are.

The driver’s attitude, behaviour and ability are truly what makes the difference in terms of road safety.   Great drivers obey the laws, drive within the limits of the road, the vehicle and the equipment.  Great drivers respect other road users.  Give me a great driver with ‘bad’ equipment any day over a bad driver with the best equipment.  Great drivers understand that even with their own great abilities, other drivers don’t share the same skill so they are ready for the errors of others.

Thank you all for your input into this list.  Use all your safety equipment available.  Drive within the limits of conditions (road, weather and ability) and be a great road user.

New 7 Day Impoundment Legislation

On December 1st, 2010 new Highway Traffic Act Offences were implemented that have to do with the impoundment of motor vehicles for various offences.  The new sections come under the umbrella of the Road Safety Act, 2009 (Bill 126) and are administrative suspensions.

The sections allow for vehiclesto be impounded for 7 days when the people driving them have committed the following offences:





1.) A driver who's licence has been suspended for any reason, including default of family support (with the exception of unpaid fines or medical reasons) is caught driving. Section 55.2 HTA

2.) A driver who is required to have an ignition interlock device and are found driving without one. Section 41.4 HTA
3.) A driver caught with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over 0.08 or who fails/refuses to comply with a demand made by a police officer under section 254 of the Criminal Code of Canada.  Section 48.4 HTA

OK, so that is the legal stuff. Here is what it all really means and what is important for you to remember.

All these offences identify high risk road users.  Those people who have a disregard for the rules of the road and the safety of all of us.

Drivers receive suspension for several reasons.  Most commonly for breaking the rules of the road to such a degree that the punishment handed down by the courts is a suspension.  Some offences come with mandatory suspensions and you can bet that those are the offences that are high risk behaviours that compromise the safety of everyone.  (Impaired driving, stunt driving, multiple demerit point accumulations, etc) = High risk road user.

For a driver to be required to have an ignition interlock device, they have had to have broken the law in terms of drinking and driving.  Part of their conviction is the order that they must have the device installed on any vehicle they drive.  It is a requirement on their licence. = High risk road user.

Anyone charged with over 80 or refusing / failing to comply with the demand, naturally =  High risk road users.

Like I said...the vast majority of us never have to worry about these things.  It is only those drivers who have been self identified as high risk road users.  Self identified? Yes, they are the ones in control of their behaviours and their actions on our roads.

They are the ones who have completely missed section 31 of the Highway Traffic Act:

Driving a privilege

The purpose of this Part is to protect the public by ensuring that,

31.

(a) the privilege of driving on a highway is granted to, and retained by, only those persons who demonstrate that they are likely to drive safely; and

(b) full driving privileges are granted to novice and probationary drivers only after they acquire experience and develop or improve safe driving skills in controlled conditions.  1993, c. 40, s. 1.

No one has the right to drive.  It is a privilege and one that if you don't comply with or abide by the rules and regulations, that privilege is taken away from you.

Back to the impoundments...

The legislation doesn't say the vehicle of the driver...it says the vehicle that is being used by the driver. 

So parents...are you willing to part with your car for seven days because of the behaviour choices of your children?  This is something that you really need to discuss with them so that they understand the importance of good choices.

Friends...are you willing to lose your car for seven days because you loaned it to a friend?  Make sure they have a licence, they aren't required to have an ignition interlock device and they aren't going to be drinking.

These are just a few of things that you have to consider.  Also, the bill for the towing and impoundment doesn't go in the name of the driver...it's in the name of the registered owner of the vehicle.  

Hope this help to educate a few people. 

Remember, RIDE is out there all this month.

Pedestrian collision prevention - Education, Awareness and Responsibility

My daughters are in the thick of learning how to read right now.  Some words they see and say, some they sound out and get right, while others they just can’t find the ways yet to put the sounds together and miss it completely.

When that happens, I have a choice to make.  Do I help them with the word or just ignore their mistakes and let them go on repeating their errors?  I mean, at their age, who really cares…it’s not like they are reading anything that can be the difference between passing their grade or failing…yet.  But I can assure you, if their errors aren’t pointed out, it will make a huge difference someday.  As painful as it may be, pointing out their errors is in their best interest for long-term success.

It’s a lot like pedestrian safety.  My partner and I had a very busy day answering media questions about the ‘sudden spike’ in pedestrian collisions over the last 48 hours.  (If you go back to just before Halloween, we were warning people that this was going to happen.)

The media wanted to know who is to blame, who is at fault, why is this happening and why people aren’t getting the message.  So we responded to the questions.

Who is to blame?

Simple…road users.

Who is at fault?

Simple…road users who aren’t aware, alert and observant.

Why is this happening?

Human error, distraction, environment, daylight savings time, clothing choices, ambient light, on and on.

Why aren’t people getting the message?

No answer from me…I guess you would have to ask the people who are causing the problems.

You see, road safety is everyone’s responsibility.  Plain and simple.  Everyone who uses the roads plays a role in the ensuring safety for themselves and for the other road users around them.

When a pedestrian is stuck by a vehicle, the pedestrian will always be on the losing end.  The easy thing to do would be to blame the driver for not doing their part in ensuring the safety of the pedestrian.  But, sometimes that is not the right thing to do, nor is it ever the proper thing to do for long term success of reducing collisions, injury and death.

A pedestrian who isn’t watching where they are going, disobeying traffic signals, impeding traffic, wearing dark clothes at night, crossing mid-block is not doing anything to help keep our roads safe.  They aren’t doing anything to keep themselves safe.

A driver who is distracted, travelling too fast for conditions, not looking where they need to be, impaired, etc,  is not doing anything to help keep our roads safe.  They aren’t doing anything to keep themselves safe and they aren’t doing anything to keep pedestrians safe.

A pedestrian who crosses a street mid-block at night wearing dark clothing, texting, where street lights are burnt out while listening to an MP3 player is doing nothing in terms of taking personal responsibility for their own safety.  According to many people today, I should ignore that and never point things out like that because I could be blaming the ‘victim’ (I’ll get to that in a minute).

You bet I’m going to point that out!

Now, what if a car strikes that pedestrian?  You bet I’m going to question why the driver didn’t see the pedestrian.  I’m going to ask about the speed, the lighting the location, the sight lines, the environment.  I’m going to point out that each road user has responsibility for one another.

Interviews

This whole post is because of how interviews are turned into reports.  You can be sure that when PC Hugh Smith and I are interviewed we look at all angles of any incident and where there is a safety message to any category of road user, driver, cyclist, pedestrian or transit user, we include it.

Anytime there are two people involved, each of their actions will be analyzed.  If there is any message that we can bring to light to help educate and raise awareness, we’ll bring it up.

But, no matter what we say, we do not have the last word.  It is always up to the reporters to file and even then, editors and producers have their opportunity to massage a report.  So the final copy rarely tells the whole story.

So when you read or watch, understand that there is way more information that doesn’t make a story than does.

Victim

In traffic safety, we avoid referring to anyone as a victim.  Since a pedestrian is considered a vulnerable road user, (none or little protection), people naturally refer to them as the victim.  They do get the worst of it after all. We refer to them as the injured party. Simply stated they are not always the victim.  A pedestrian that steps onto the roadway into the path of the car, not allowing the driver any opportunity to avoid striking that pedestrian can very successfully be argued as the actually the victim of someone else’s action.  Sure the pedestrian is going to be on the losing end.

All the parties involved are victimized in one manner or another.  Our society as a whole can be argued as the victims.  Because of a bad crash, roads get closed, transportation flow is compromised, people miss meetings, goods are delayed, infrastructure suffers, etc…we are all victims. 

In the end, if our road safety messaging is interpreted as placing blame, then so be it.  I would rather point out the mistakes that have led to road tragedies in an effort to educate others from making the same mistakes then to ignore the obvious and allow the same mistakes to be perpetuated.

So, that’s my view. What are yours? Agree, disagree? Let me know.  The communication is what creates awareness and education.  Thanks for reading.

Sharing the road with streetcars

Streetcars present a unique challenge to Toronto road users, but at the same time are very simple to share the road with.  A couple of things that make them easy to be around is that they can't change lanes, they are very visible and they are only found on roads with rail lines running on them.  They only turn onto roads that also have intersecting tracks, but they do make those turns from lanes that we aren't accustomed to seeing traffic legally turn from.  In fact, if you make the same turn they do...you will be charged.

They are recognized in the Highway Traffic Act because there are specific laws regarding them and how you need to behave around them to be sharing the road with them for every one's safety.

Almost every law that applies to the driver of a motor vehicle or a cyclist applies to the operator of a streetcar and vice verse.

You can pass a streetcar that is in motion on the right side only.  Like every rule, there are exceptions...

1. If the streetcar is travelling on a one-way street, you can pass it on the left.
2. You can not pass on the right through the approach area of a pedestrian crossover.

Always look at a streetcar as a moving intersection, after all it does have stop signs on it.  When a streetcar is approaching an intersection don't try to pass it.  You can safely assume that it is going to stop. When it stops, the side doors may or may not open.  The safest practice is to stay behind the streetcar until it goes into motion again.

You can't see past it so trying to pass it at an intersection is a recipe for trouble in the case where a pedestrian is trying to catch it from the side you can't see or a car/cyclist blows a red light and creams you as you clear the front of the streetcar.

When the doors are open it is against the law to pass it or approach the doors to closely.  This applies to both motor vehicle drivers, cyclists, skateboarders, roller bladers, e-bikes, etc.

Pedestrians are not allowed onto the roadway until the streetcar has come to a full stop and the doors have opened.  Having said that...they will, so again, go back to the point of don't pass a streetcar as it nears an intersection.

For those of you that complain that streetcars enter intersections on amber lights, you should know that there is a mechanism on them that talks to the intersection.  It holds that light amber so that the streetcar can make it through which creates a better traffic flow for all of us.

The LRT lines are designed to specifically allow a free flow of traffic around the street car lanes.  No vehicles are allowed on them except streetcars and other authorized TTC vehicles.  (You will on occasion see police, fire and ambulance use them - seconds save lives).

Make sure when you are travelling parallel to LRT lines (Spadina, Queens Quay, StClair to name a few) that you pay attention to the traffic signals especially at turning points.  The streetcars have their own signals as do you....mix them up and you run the risk of being T-boned by 20 tonnes or so of metal.

Here are some safety tips from the TTC website

Here is the Highway Traffic Act

Take The Pledge, Share and WIN!!!

As many of you know, I have been a big supporter of the "No Phone Zone" Pledge that Oprah started near the beginning of this year.

The concept is simple. You decide that you want to make your car a "No Phone Zone", sign the pledge and follow through by not allowing your phone to be a distraction to your driving. It's a great idea and in Ontario...IT IS THE LAW!! $155 for talking, texting, typing, reading. Hands holding a device? $155. Watching a DVD, $155.

But really, what is the fine compared to the potential of crashing and taking the life of a loved one or yourself?

April 30, 2010 was the day for the #NoPhoneZone across the world and in Toronto, we did a great job of letting everyone know that we supported the idea. Thank goodness we did, because with the number of charges that the Toronto Police have issued to people (Over 6000 to date), I'd hate to see what it would be like if we didn't support it!

So, what is this all about? I want to keep Toronto moving toward safer roads and make Toronto the number one city in the world to support the pledge..so here is my offer.

1.) Pledge your committment to making your car a "No Phone Zone"

http://www.oprah.com/questionaire/ipledge.html?id=4

2.) Share your committment of your pledge on Facebook

There is a Share Button for Facebook on the page that appears after you submit your pledge.

3.) Let me know you pledged on Twitter
Tweet, "Hey @TrafficServices I just pledged to make my car a #NoPhoneZone #Toronto" and attach your Facebook Status Link.

I will aggregate all the Tweets that you send out between June 19 and June 23, enter them into a randomizer and allow a computer to determine who the lucky winners of 5 incredible, amazing and unbelievable prize packs will be awarded.

Once the computer spits out the Twitter ID's I will let you know via Twitter who you are and arrange for your prize pick-ups.

No Phone Zone Information

http://www.youtube.com/user/TPSTSVSafety#p/u

http://www.oprah.com/packages/no-phone-zone.html

Distracted Driving Information

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/safety/distracted-driving/index.shtml

http://trafficservicestps.blogspot.com/2010/04/oprah-is-on-my-blog.html

Road users have Collisions, Children have 'accidents'

For the last couple years I have made a point of correcting people when the word “Accident” is used to describe an event where people, vehicles, etc come into contact. A couple of weeks ago, my correction of someone’s use of the word led to an email debate over Accident vs. Collision/Crash/Wreck.

That is what prompted this post.

Definitions:

According the Oxford Dictionary an accident is described as:
Noun – 1.) an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally. 2.) an incident that happens by chance or without apparent cause. 3.) chance

I will concede that according to some of that definition, an accident could be used to describe a crash. But, it truly is not unexpected, a crash never happens without apparent cause and chance? Please. I believe this definition was never meant to be used to describe a collision.

Using the same Oxford Dictionary a Collision is:
Noun – an instance of colliding
And a Crash is:
Verb – (of a vehicle) collide violently with an obstacle or another vehicle.
Finally Wreck is:
Noun – 3.) a building, vehicle, etc. that has been destroyed or badly damaged. 4) a road or rail crash.

Using any of those definitions, Collision, Crash, Wreck is far more accurate than accident to describe the coming together of vehicle, bicycles, cars and people.

Whoose to blame:

Collectively we all need to get our houses in order to help prevent collisions and something as simple as changing our vernacular can be a benefit.

I believe that when we use the word accident we give people an ‘out’ of the responsibility that needs to be felt. Accident allows people the thought that what happened couldn’t be avoided; it was something that was unforeseen and unavoidable. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The common denominator is human behaviour, which leads to human error. The worlds safest roadways can become filled with the bodies of dead and injured by the factor of disregarding simple safety and common sense rules while the worst roads travelled with awareness, adherence to laws, operating within safety guides for the conditions and alert behaviours can be injury and death free.

Now, I will also concede that law enforcement, media, insurance companies and government play a role in this mess. The reports that the police in Ontario file with the MTO are called Accident Reports. Most insurance company websites will refer to the word accident, media will report accidents as they happen.

The term accident became part of the vernacular of describing collisions and crashes somewhere along the way and has cemented itself there. We shouldn’t be using the word just because that is what people are used to hearing. We should be using the words that describe what it is. I think we can all be leaders by changing the words and helping to put blame where it belongs.

Accident makes the liability, blame and cause of collisions minimal at best and creates an escape clause for those responsible for the event. I saw an insurance company website recently that promoted a "responsibility project" that used the term accident all through their material. If any industry has a reason to put blame and fault where it belongs, it’s the insurance industry.

Collisions are predictable and preventable. Drive distracted, impaired, fatigued, aggressive, unaware or unskilled and you will cause injuries and or death.

Nothing on the roads just all of a sudden happens. There is a period where the event develops or unfolds and someone has done something wrong, illegal or unsafe.

Sure, you never get home and say to your spouse, “Wow, I just saw a huge collision.” You more than likely say accident. The person who was hit in a collision might say they were the victims of an accident, but the totality of the event is a collision that could have been prevented.

And yes, sometimes even the people who are hit can bear some responsibility. If you are driving aware and alert, you might see that a car is going to go through a red light, but all too often, we see that we have the perceived right of way and assume the way is clear for us.

So do us all a favour, stop using the word accident. Collision is more accurate, crash is more dynamic and wreck, well that’s just plain cool.

I have tried and tried and tried, but no matter what, I can’t think of one scenario that can allow for the word accident to be used. Can you? Let me know, have your say. Tell me I’m wrong or tell me I’m right. Leave a comment to share with everyone.

If you want to use the word accident, keep it to describing what children have when they are toilet training.

Do we tolerate too many traffic deaths?

This is the title of a New York Times article from May 27, 2010. Some of the people who I receive regular updates from their writings and agencies were interviewed for the article.

I don't respond to a many articles I read but this one I felt compelled to. The reason? This is a topic that I agree completely with. We DO tolerate too many traffic deaths.

Here is my response. (#41 of the comment section.) Does that mean I can say that I have been published in the NYT?!?

Do we tolerate too many traffic deaths? Yes we do!

I fail to see why there is a debate with this issue. One death on our roads is one too many. The goal of zero deaths is honourable, but not likely. Having said that, any progress to attaining that goal is worthwhile and necessary.

Recently the world went into a sate of panic and fear based on a disease that killed a few hundred people and was classified as a pandemic. Governments were throwing obscene amounts of money towards the prevention, treatment and education for the public and health officials.

Yet, the pandemic numbers of injured and dead from the H1N1 globally did not come close to the number of injured and dead in any civilized nation.

You can argue cause and reason, factors and formulas or environment and engineering all you want. The common denominator is human behaviour which leads to human error. The worlds safest roadways can become filled with the bodies of dead and injured by the factor of disregarding simple safety and common sense rules while the worst roads travelled with awareness, adherence to laws, operating within safety guides for the conditions and alert behaviours can be injury and death free.

I believe the media, insurance companies, governments and law enforcement bears the burden of one major problem in the acceptance of road deaths and injuries. The term accident became part of the vernacular of describing collisions and crashes somewhere along the way and has cemented itself there.

Accident makes the liability, blame and cause of collisions minimal at best and creates an escape clause for those responsible for the event. I saw an insurance company website recently that promoted a "responsibility project" that used the term accident all through their material. If any industry has a reason to put blame and fault where it belongs, its the insurance industry.

Collisions are predictable and preventable. Drive distracted, impaired, fatigued, aggressive, unaware or unskilled and you will cause injuries and or death.

Do we tolerate too many traffic deaths? Yes we do. One person with one gun and fifteen bullets on a rampage would be national headlines for days/months. That persons actions, background, triggers, soci-economic status and position n society would make for grand headlines and debate.

One person with one car driving impaired or aggressive, distracted or unskilled has at any given moment in a city or urban environment, the potential to kill many, many more people, but yet we respond with barely a raised eyebrow at that person being arrested or crashing without incident.

Last point. Think of the money that is directed to health care and the legal industries from the results of collisions. Billions of dollars to treat the injured, facilitate long term disability changes, prosecute accused persons, incarcerate those and pay for the ensuing law suits. I have no idea how much money is directed to just those two ares, but suffice to say; could you imagine how many hungry children could be fed with that money. How many seniors could receive better and more adequate health care. How many veterans could be honourably be taken care of for their service to our countries. The laundry list of positive uses of the redirection of those monies is long and far better for the overall good of our communities.

Do we tolerate too many traffic deaths? Yes, sadly we do. So lets stop tolerating them. Train better drivers, punish those appropriately who endanger public safety, place the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of those that deserve it and treat the totality of event for what they are...an ongoing pandemic.

Sgt. Tim Burrows
Toronto Police Service - Traffic Services

For the article click here.

Photo credit: Red Huber/Orlando Sentinel, via Associated Press

Life or Death...Which one do you want?

A couple of weeks ago, the Toronto Police took part in the Provincial Spring Seat Belt Campaign. We do this every year to support our other policing and safety partners to raise awareness, educate the public and of course give out some tickets. (Yes, there is your opportunity to tell me that this is just another cash grab, revenue generating program...but before you do that remember, its your choice if you want a ticket or not.)

One of our major points of focus this year was child safety seats. Through several inspection

clinics that we run every year across Toronto we regular see 80 to 90 percent of child seats that are installed incorrectly.

As a police officer, I have seen first hand the importance. You only need to see the pain in a parents face as their child is attended to by medical staff because they suffered injuries which could have been prevented had their child been properly restrained. As a father I know the importance of ensuring my children are always restrained properly in their child safety seats.

The biggest problem that I have seen about improper car seat installations is that they are simply not in tight enough. Parents put the seat belts around the seat or the latch system in place snug it down and then that's it. What about when the child gets in the seat? Do you not think their weight will create extra movement on the seat since it is no longer snug?

So, when you put your seat in, put your weight on it...pull the belts tight. Once your weight is out of it, the seat won't move. Some parents have told me that they are afraid of putting wight in it because they don't want to break it! Come on, let it break then as opposed to in a crash. (The reality is it won't break).

One of the most frustrating calls we receive is from a frantic father who has been told that he can't take his child home from the hospital because he doesn't have a proper car seat. WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST 9 MONTHS...Didn't have enough time?

You can call 416-808-1975 to get information on child seat inspection clinics that are near you.

The last thing I want to talk about is what a seat belt is designed to do. It is not designed to save your life or prevent injuries. It is designed to keep you in your car and in your seat.

• Does it save lives? YES
• Does it reduce injuries? YES
• Have people died while wearing them? YES
• Have people been injured while wearing them? YES

Have less people been killed and have less injuries occurred? YES

The law is:

• One belt / one person
• All under 16 must be belted (driver responsible)
• Lap and shoulder belt must be worn properly
• All seat belts must function if someone is sitting in that spot

There are no exemptions for:

• "I was only going a short distance."
• "I just got back in the car after a quick stop."
• "But, my kids were acting up."
• "This is the first time I haven't worn it."

If you are on the road, your belt has to be on your body. If your children are in the car, they have to be secured in their properly installed seats.

Which price would you rather pay? Death or injury. Life or death, which one do you want?

Want to leave a comment? Agree, disagree? Let me know what you think. What if Health Care refused to cover you for injuries that were caused by the lack of use of a sat belt...like going through the windshield.

Similar Posts

Child Seat Inspection Clinic

Provincial Seat Belt Campaign

The Value of Social Media in Law Enforcement

I wrote this post for Scroll.ning.com, where it was first posted. See the original here.

This is certainly not the “All traffic - all the time” post that you would normally expect me to write. Although, yes there will be traffic stuff in here. This is a post about why I do so much work in the Social Media Medium (SMM) and why you should be interested in it.

Now, let’s be realistic. In terms of ‘so much work in SMM’ I am a newbie, an amateur and ‘quiet’ compared to some of the rockstars that I follow. People like Amber Macarthur (@ambermac), Scott Stratten (@unmarketing), Chris Brogan (@chrisbrogan) and a few others that have nothing to do with law enforcement. Pioneers in the use Social Media for Law Enforcement like Scott Mills (@grafittibmxcop), Warren Bulmer (@warren_bulmer), Lauri Stevens (@lawscomm) and Christa Miller (@christammiller). So what qualifies me to write about it? Passion (more on that in a bit). I love the SMM and the doors that it has opened for me.

As Sgt. Tim Burrows of the Toronto Police Service, my ability to reach out to the community is limited by the timing and reception of the main stream media (MSM). If the MSM is busy with breaking news or full of their mandated or preferred content my message is not going to go anywhere. Further, due to things that are out of my control and in many cases journalists control, like editing and questions that I can’t finesse into my message, my intended message can be lost. Enter Social Media (TA DA!).

As anyone of my SMM identities that I use on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Blogger and several more, I can message when I want, about what I want and in as much detail or frequency as I choose. Enough about me...it’s all about YOU! Remember I said passion earlier?...here it is. I’m a cop that believes in the motto “To Serve and Protect” deeply. I am a servant to the citizens of Toronto and the Toronto Police Service. I want to do mart part to help the Toronto Police Service accomplish their mission, “...to make Toronto the best and safest place to be. I can best do that where I have any control or influence. For me, that’s talking about traffic safety (Woo Hoo, he’s back to traffic stuff).

My goal is simple in philosophy, but difficult in attainment. Why? I don’t have nearly as much control over it as YOU do. Your choices and behaviours dictate the accomplishment of my goal which is, “To reduce collisions, injuries and death in Toronto”.

So why set a goal that I can’t control? Because it is in YOUR best interest. If something I Tweet, post, upload or tag can benefit you, influence your behaviour or change your attitude then we ALL benefit. Just think, if the approximately 2 Billion dollars that gets funneled to the cover the societal costs of traffic collisions could be redirected to benefit hungry children, abused women, senior care and cancer research. Right now those monies go to insurance claims, injury treatment and rehabilitation, economic cost of transportation stop-ages, investigation, court process’ and many, many more hard and soft, direct and indirect costs.

Alcohol, drugs, occupant restraint infractions, extreme and distracted driving all lead to collisions, injury and death. Try to argue that with me and you will only show your own lack of research ability.

So when I can remind you of that in any way I can, we all can benefit. When you choose to ‘buy into’ my messages we all will benefit. Now, here is an added benefit. The messages that surround traffic safety don’t just affect Toronto. Those messages apply to nearly the entire world. Don’t drink and drive, slow down to see more, wear your seatbelt, be a cooperative driver, watch for pedestrians and cyclists, obey the rules of the road, etc, etc, etc, you get it. Here is one more reason. We are all traffic. Yup no matter what you think you are part of traffic. The movement of people and goods. Pedestrian, check. Cyclist, check. Transit user, check. Driver, check. Mobility challenged, check.

So here is my unabashed plug...no apologies for this one because I think I said why it would be beneficial. Find me on SM, friend, follow, join me. Then share what I have to say, if you find value in it, add your own comments, tell me what you think would help all of us. While you are at, join my friends that I mentioned. Each have value that can add to your lives. I wouldn’t plug them here if they didn’t.

twitter.com/TrafficServices

facebook.com = Toronto Police - Traffic Services Highway Patrol

trafficservicestps.blogspot.com

YouTube.com/TPSTSVSafety

There are no 'accidents' on our highways

~~Editor's Note~~
Reprinted Article
This is an article from Jim Kenzie's, The Driver's Seat, which appeared on-line February 23, 2010.
You can read the original article here.

One of the main advantages of a blog to me is that I can answer readers' e-mails and letters, and broadcast them to a wider audience.

It is also, as She Who Must Be Obeyed a.k.a. the Chancellor of the Exchequer notes, a way to get PAID for answering my e-mail, which otherwise I do for free!

BTW, I DO try to answer as many e-mails personally as I can; forgive me if I don't always succeed.

Anyway, a reader complained about my Carte Blanche in the print edition of Wheels recently on the sad death of Brendan Burke, son of Leafs' General Manager Brian Burke, which included a harangue against the use of the word 'accident' to describe car crashes.

The reader wrote:
*************
Check your dictionary. If it was an unexpected event then it was an accident. If it was an unintended event the nit was an accident. If it was by chance or mishap, then it was an accident.
Most words in the English language have more than one meaning. You are entitled to your preference: an event without apparent cause, but other uses for the word should not be condemned.
**************

To which I replied:English is an incredibly rich language, due at least in part - or so I am told - to the British Navy! England effectively ruled the world for several centuries, and its language benefited immensely from contributions from several diverse sources.

So we have many words available to us to describe various meanings or shades of meaning, and it is imperative, especially for professional communicators, to be as selective and precise as we can be.

As you say, we also have many words which have multiple meanings. In some cases, popular usage and context have given certain words specific connotations which we also must respect, whether we like them or not.

For example, your boss might be a cheerful, happy person, but in today's parlance, you might want to be careful about calling him 'gay', even if that is a technically correct way of describing his personality. Unless he or she is also 'gay' in the modern sense of that word; not that there's anything wrong with that.

Again, it is imperative that we choose words that do not come loaded with sub-textual meaning, lest our original intentions become muddied.

I do in fact check my dictionary frequently. As you may be able to tell already, words and their meanings are very important to me, as they should be to every writer. Words are even a major component of two of my main hobbies - I am a 'cryptic crossword' puzzle enthusiast, and one of my major tasks in my little rock 'n' roll band is making sure I get the lyrics correct, even for the songs on which the other guys sing lead!

I hope you would accept that the Oxford Dictionary is a reasonable arbiter in determining the meanings of words. Here's what the on-line version of Oxford has to say about 'accident':
1. an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally.
2. an incident that happens by chance or without apparent cause.
3. chance.

The first meaning seems to agree with your definition. But the other two meanings use the word "chance", which implies a sense of randomness to the incident. Definition 2 specifically mentions "without apparent cause", and that certainly does NOT apply to car crashes, which virtually always have definitive, predictable and largely preventable causes.

In other words (!) it is not merely the absence of intent which causes something to be labeled an "accident".

Consider the field of jurisprudence. There is a major distinction between 'murder' and 'involuntary manslaughter'. My understanding of the law (my father was a lawyer) is that 'intent' is a major differentiator. But the victim is still dead; a crime has been committed. You would not say that a death determined to be 'involuntary manslaughter' was an 'accident' solely because there was no 'intent' to kill the person. It did NOT happen by 'chance'; there WAS a cause.

There are also varying degrees of negligence in the law, some of which call for criminal punishment. Again, perhaps there was no 'intent' to commit a crime, but failure to take reasonable precautions also can impart guilt. Likewise in civil cases.

And so it is in virtually every car crash. There is either an action that WAS done by someone which caused the crash to occur, or an action that was NOT done, and the negligence in not doing so was what allowed the crash to happen.

Consider these two descriptions of a hypothetical traffic crash:

(1): Joe Schmoe, 40, was killed in a car accident last night. His car lost control and ran head-on into a minivan carrying a family of six. Schmoe and the six family members were all pronounced dead at the scene.

(2) Joe Schmoe, 40, was killed last night when the Mississauga resident, whose Blood Alcohol Content was posthumously measured at 0.10 (0.08 is the legal limit) and who had not taken any advanced driver training, abandoned control of his car when it began to skid on a slippery corner.
The car ran head-on into a minivan carrying a family of six. Schmoe, who was not wearing his seat belt, was ejected from the car and died on impact. All six family members were also killed.

To me, and to virtually everyone in the traffic safety 'community' (speaking of connotations I don't like; to me, the word 'community' means people living in a geographically contiguous manner, but it has acquired a different sense in context...) the first description, notably the get-out-of-jail-free word "accident", implies that there was nothing Schmoe could have done to prevent these deaths.

True, he probably did not 'intend' to have a crash (we know a substantial percentage of fatal car crashes are suicides; we just don't know for sure how large that number is...).

But when you study the statistics, you can only conclude that Schmoe did NOT do at least one thing he could have done - learn how to drive! - to prevent the collision from happening at all; and he DID at least two things that increased the chances of it being fatal, both to himself and to the innocent victims - driving drunk, and not wearing his seat belt.

I will allow that it was by 'chance' that the minivan was involved in the crash. But without the actions taken and not taken by Schmoe, there would not have been a crash in the first place; the crash DID have a cause or causes, and hence can hardly be considered an 'accident'.

The reason we in said 'traffic safety community' rail against the 'A'-word is because it tends to let the Schmoes of the world off the hook.

Why use a word like 'accident' which adds nothing to the description of the event except a sense that there was nothing that could have been done to prevent the event, when words like 'crash' or 'collision' simply describe the event, without imparting either guilt or innocence to anyone?

That is why we are trying to eliminate the 'A'-word from media car crash descriptions.

Is this just another example of political correctness running wild?

Maybe.

But words ARE important, and we believe it is critical that we use the most accurate words we can, to make sure the full meaning of what we are trying to communicate is in fact communicated.

***********************

After the Wheels column which initiated this discussion appeared, Number One Daughter noticed a report on a fatal traffic crash in the Scarborough Mirror (one of The Star's sister company Metroland's titles) which did in fact use 'crash', not the 'A'-word, and also mentioned that the investigating police officers had not yet determined if the victims had been wearing their seat belts.

Maybe the timing of this story and my column was sheer coincidence, but at least the reporter at

The Mirror was asking the right questions.

Good on him.

I hope all media people - print, broadcast, narrow-cast, new media, whatever - will follow suit.

~~Editor's Note~~
I completely agree with Mr. Kenzie on this issue. The use of the word accident has done a terrible disservice to all of us, creating a "cop-out" mentality view of collisions. "Accident" and "not-at-fault" have minimized the liability and responsibility issues associated with collisions.

What's your thoughts? Let us know.