MBTA Bus Narrowly Avoids Pedestrian

Cambridge Police, Traffic & Parking;

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority;

Citizens of the City of Cambridge,

            Good Morning. I have written before on the issue of traffic safety in Cambridge, and specifically in Inman Square. Despite the heavy Police presence in the area, numerous traffic violations continue to occur which greatly endanger the lives of our community and most often these acts go unpunished.

            Yesterday, October 20, right about 4:16pm, a city bus driving route 83 took the often-dangerous turn from Hampshire onto Prospect with multiple pedestrians walking in the crosswalk going in both directions. This is not uncommon. Our bus drivers are far too impatient to make the light, at this intersection and also in Central Square, and fail to sufficiently consider the safety and well-being of the community. On this occasion, however, Bus #0717 narrowly avoided hitting a woman in the crosswalk while making the turn. She was already in the crosswalk before the bus made the turn, as, again, was at least one other pedestrian, going the other way, and this woman came within an inch of being slammed into by the full force of this giant vehicle, or so it appeared from fifteen feet away as I approached the same crosswalk with my children.

            And I honestly didn’t know what to do about it. This driver should absolutely have their license revoked; we do not want this person driving a bus or commercial vehicle anywhere. They must be dismissed by the MBTA. And they should face some sort of legal penalty. But who do I call? What evidence do I have, other than my own testimony? The woman herself seemed happy enough to be alive and unharmed, and while the incident clearly upset her, I do not know whether she is going to report it. Should I have dialed the CPD? And asked to be transferred to Traffic? Should I report the incident to the MBTA, or will they, with no corroborating evidence, choose to protect their own? Should I reach out to progressive members of the City Council and local newspapers, or are they only concerned with the safety of bicyclists these days?

            Seriously: What should I have done, as a concerned citizen? I call the CPD when I feel it is necessary to report something important: they always ask for my name and phone number. Why? Is there a record on me so they can say, “Hey, this guy cries, ‘Wolf!’ every time someone disturbs the peace or breaks some law that nobody cares to enforce anyhow, so why should we listen to him now, just because it affects public safety?” I do not wish to sound cynical; I just want to know how we, as members of the community, can work together with law enforcement and other branches of the city government to create a better Cambridge (or Somerville, or wherever you live.)  And of course, we need to instill in our entire community the fact that we need the police, to protect us and enforce the laws that are meant to keep us safe; at the same time, we need to feel a sense of personal responsibility and vestment in our neighborhoods, and do our part to help. This is difficult when we have so many short-term residents, people who did not grow up here, who are not going to raise their children here, or even if they do, not send them to Cambridge Public Schools, etc., but this is the city we have and we all need to work together and share that responsibility.

            This was no isolated incident. I only highlight it because of its egregiousness and because I happen to have the bus # and exact time and, maybe someone can look into this. Perhaps the bus itself has a camera that may have captured this. I don’t know. I do know about a half an hour earlier, at the same intersection, some woman was trying to run a red light in her car but was blocked by another vehicle and proceeded to honk her horn at him! Why are you honking when you have a red light?

            Please, let’s do something about this. I know the police cannot be everywhere, all the time. I strongly believe, however, that traffic safety should be at the top of priorities for law enforcement in the City of Cambridge. I don’t think I am alone in holding these sentiments.  

Legalize It!

            Voters in Massachusetts will soon have the opportunity to approve legislation legalizing the use, possession, cultivation and limited distribution of marijuana with some restrictions and, of course, taxation. Many of us have trouble understanding why the issue of legalization is at all contentious. It is, in fact, patently bizarre, that with all the freedoms we now enjoy in this nation, that a flower with the ability to promote health and joy should remain criminal. Citizens can exercise their Second Amendment right to purchase automated firearms that did not exist when James Madison drafted the Bill of Rights; two consenting adults of the same gender can now be wedded just as their heterosexual counterparts have done throughout the history of civilization; individuals can engage in fornication or perform other sexual acts for money, provided there is a third-party and a camera, and we refer to this form of prostitution as pornography; a large demographic of American taxpayers have a portion of their earnings forcibly confiscated and distributed to organizations promoting a medical procedure that they sincerely believe to be an act against human life….and yet, the flower remains illegal, and provides a continued excuse to marginalize African Americans, ethnic minorities and the economically disadvantaged.

            This plant has been criminalized in America for less than a century; not too long before that, there were no restrictions whatsoever upon this crop that George Washington, like so many colonists and early citizens of the Union, grew for its industrial and, later, medicinal uses. Now I’m not a total libertarian, not in general nor, specifically, when it comes to drug regulation. The continued opioid epidemic should teach us the dangers of powerfully concentrated substances. In hindsight, perhaps heroin was not the miraculous cure for the pernicious scourge of morphine addiction that it was initially touted to be. LSD-25, despite its purported psychological and spiritual benefits (which I believe the academic disciplines are finally getting back around to investigating, after those wacky decades of foolishness and ensuing hysteria) is just too powerful to rest in the hands of common mortals. And in fact, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh does raise a valid concern over the danger of concentrated cannabis “edibles” and particularly their availability and appeal to minors if the proposed law does go into effect. I once, stupidly enough, had a large helping of the prescription drug Marinol, pure synthetic THC, and it was, literally, a nightmare. The ancient Greeks were wise enough to lay down the maxim “Nothing overmuch” two and a half millennia ago. And yet, even at these concentrations there is no risk of death from overdose. I think the only real danger from a stoned populace (aside from potential reduction in productivity and efficiency) is the effect it could have on motorists and other operators of machinery and vehicles. The fact is, however, that we already have a stoned populace, and that not only alcohol but many prescription and over-the-counter medications can impair driving as well, not to mention all the digital distractions creating unsafe traffic environments. Legislation has limited if any ability to control these factors, sadly, and we must look to other channels to ensure we are all mutually vested in promoting safety and awareness. I sincerely believe that transforming the stoner demographic into participant adult citizens, rather than branding them as an irresponsible and immature counterculture of arbitrary dissidence and lethargic apathy, would contribute to this dialogue; and in fact, if we all took a toke now and then, new and innovative ideas would be brought to the table as marijuana, capable of impairing rational thought, can also inspire novel and unconventional perspectives and suggest solutions to what the sober-minded have conceived as an impasse.  

            The true reason for marijuana being criminalized rests in industrial lobbyists, specifically the rope industry, as hemp presented a threat to their monopolistic business practices. Other propaganda was used to threaten respectable Americans with the idea of wild, dangerous Mexicans and African-Americans bent on violence and (crime of crimes) lusting after decent white women. The real reason its legalization is still being resisted with such vehemence today is the combined interest of Big Pharma, who would rather the taxpayer continue to fund their R&D divisions so they can continue to buy up property in our neighborhoods and sell us toxic chemicals to manipulate the natural functioning of our brains, rather than use a safe, healthy and organic substance to mediate stress, depression, and chronic pain and inflammation; and the corporate prison system, which steals fathers from their families and installs them as cheap labor contracted out to unethical and greedy corporate giants like Whole Foods.

            Legalizing marijuana in the Commonwealth would help to support the local (and national) economy, siphoning US dollars out of current illicit channels, defund the prison pipeline, and empower policy-makers to cooperate with the community in focusing on the opioid epidemic. I hope to see you at the polls on November 8^th. In the immortal words of reggae legend and international freedom fighter Peter Tosh,

            “Legalize it!”

@dGabeEvau

Boston: Let's Vote on Driverless Cars

            City Officials in Boston have recently announced plans to allow testing of driverless vehicles in the city. As can be expected, citizens are expressing mixed-reactions to this news; as far as I can tell, however, the populace was never consulted to give consent to these tests – the decision was made by the Swiss “World Economic Forum” – and we can only speculate that some corporation or other has or will be consulted prior to any consent of the governed.

            Boston is notorious across the nation for its abysmal driving record. Whether the cause is truly incompetent motorists, there is no doubt that there are serious safety issues related to traffic in Boston – and across the river here in Cambridge. (I have previously brought attention and called for action to increase traffic safety in Inman Square.)  It is well nigh possible that, some sunshine day, robotic vehicles (auto-auto’s, let’s call them) will literally help to pave safer streets for Bostonians, students, tourists, diplomats and all the others who must navigate the city gridlock. We, The People, should soberly and logically consider whether this is a goal worth pursuing for the world we shape for our children, and whether this course be appropriate, after weighing the available evidence and considering differing viewpoints; it is our duty as members of this great government (for that is what every American citizen is by right) to look beyond our own prejudices for or against this technology, and truly come to a majority consensus before we set about to put our best wheel forward.

            I will not make any pretense as to where I stand at the moment – personally I think this technology will only introduce new elements of danger and uncertainty to what is already a hazardous situation seriously in need of change. I believe the way to that change is through expanding awareness and building dialogue. Motorists, cyclists and pedestrians must work together to construct a safer community for all. I want our children to remember the legend of John Henry, to grow up with a sense of human dignity, and the sincere belief that a man (or woman) is much greater than any machine will ever be. We look to the internet, rather than our elders, as a source of knowledge; we entrust a disconcerting amount of our social lives and recreation to computers.

            How can auto-pilot prevent auto-accidents when the only thing known to crash more than a car is a computer? Imagine a robot pedestrian in the middle of a crosswalk with a drunk driver speeding towards it --- suddenly the pupils of the robot’s digital photo-receptors glaze over; an hourglass or, depending on the manufacturer and OS, rainbow circle starts spinning around and the giant hulk of metal just stands there to be demolished. Human beings don’t “crash” in this sense of the word nearly as often unless they are narcoleptic or junkies. I wouldn’t trust a robot to cross the street at 2 in the afternoon; why would I trust a computer to navigate the cross-traffic of cars, trucks bicycles and wheelchairs during rush hour?

            I wouldn’t. But like I said, policy and social norms shouldn’t be the product of my silly fears and tenuous analogies, but of the determined consensus of the community, the true stakeholders in this matter, after careful consideration of the available evidence.

Coincidentally or not, Tesla is also making headlines for an alleged auto-pilot fatality in China back in January, just now making the news here, although there is already one acknowledge casualty of their semi-autonomous vehicles in Florida this may.

We may not be able to stop this technology from coming to the city eventually. Hopefully, once all the bugs are worked out, it will truly create a safer urban environment for everyone – even if it undermines countless jobs of working Americans in the process. But we should have a say whether we want our neighborhood to be used as a guinea-pig while the companies sort through all the errors that will supplant the dreaded “human factor” someday soon – or won’t, if we take a stand.                                                                                                                                                                                      @dGabeEvau