ACPD Blocking Key Bridge Access, Threatening Cyclists

[arlrider]

So in response to the recent further collisions at N. Lynn and Lee/66, and the subsequent ARLnow articles in which ACPD claimed to have been always maintaining a presence at that intersection (which in 5 years of passing through I have never consistently seen), ACPD has now decided that they will put officers there in the morning. This consists of placing officers far downstream of the intersection where they will have no impact and instead just sit and watch traffic block the box. Yesterday it was two standing talking just south of the GW Parkway onramp; today, one standing right next to the DC sign doing nothing. Moreover, they park their vehicles in a manner so as to to take up almost the entire sidewalk – see attached photo.

Today after I took this photo, from a distance and saying nothing, the officer scowled at me as I rode by and yelled “Do you have a problem?!”. I did not say anything or respond. So, this is where we’re at – cyclists being punished for being the victims of collisions, then threatened for documenting wastes of County resources.

Any thoughts on where to go with this? Chief Scott? ARLnow? Pro-cycling County Board members?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6758[/ATTACH]

Topic

[GB]

General comment: Don’t hate on the ACPD too much for doing (part of) what we’ve been asking for in a less than perfect way. If you’ve asked for police to be at the intersection this might be a great day to thank the people you asked. I think we’ll have more luck in the future if we acknowledge the success we’ve had in the past. No one is going to try to appease a seemingly unappeasable group. This is not to say we shouldn’t ask for more/ better but make sure to say thanks for what’s been done so far.

[Terpfan]

@arlrider 96359 wrote:

It’s actually that last part right there that makes me more unhappy with the fact that ACPD has a presence there but isn’t doing anything. Cops attract attention. Attracted attention = driver distraction. Odds that drivers are looking at the cops rather than cyclists/peds? High. Their presence could make things worse.

Cuts both ways I think. Definitely will distract motorists, but if it’s frequent enough, it may also modify their behavior (eg, people slowing down at the portion of GWMP southbound by National where PP officer sometimes sits in that maintenance facility driveway).

What would make it very apparent to ArlCo/NPS/DC is if their own officers rode around on bikes or even tried crossing the streets. I bet even in uniform, they would find all sorts of issues with motorists and understand what we’re saying that much more. Perhaps wishful thinking, although I did hear a DC cop chew out a driver once who passed me when he was also on bike in front of me. More than other squad cars, he seemed to grasp the narrow pass is harrowing.

[baiskeli]

@Terpfan 96369 wrote:

What would make it very apparent to ArlCo/NPS/DC is if their own officers rode around on bikes or even tried crossing the streets. I bet even in uniform, they would find all sorts of issues with motorists and understand what we’re saying that much more. Perhaps wishful thinking, although I did hear a DC cop chew out a driver once who passed me when he was also on bike in front of me. More than other squad cars, he seemed to grasp the narrow pass is harrowing.

That’s a great idea. And bike cops may get it better than other cops.

[Steve O]

@Terpfan 96369 wrote:

What would make it very apparent to ArlCo/NPS/DC is if their own officers rode around on bikes or even tried crossing the streets.

When the ABAC had our on-street meeting last month, I asked an officer and their captain if they had ever driven through that intersection (“yes, all the time”) and ridden a bike through that intersection (“no”). I gently suggested that actually having that experience might help them understand better the concerns that cyclists have. I didn’t get the sense they would take that advice, but it’s out there.

I strongly agree that having the police ride through the intersection–preferably in plainsclothes–during rush hour and in all perturbations, would help a lot. How about they try riding a CaBi from Key Bridge to the dock at 19th & Lynn? Or Key Bridge onto w-bound Custis? Or reverse those? Etc… Would be eye-opening no doubt.

[dasgeh]

@Steve O 96383 wrote:

I strongly agree that having the police ride through the intersection–preferably in plainsclothes–during rush hour and in all perturbations, would help a lot. How about they try riding a CaBi from Key Bridge to the dock at 19th & Lynn? Or Key Bridge onto w-bound Custis? Or reverse those? Etc… Would be eye-opening no doubt.

Two ACPD officers rode the Arlington Fun Ride, so went through the intersection. I believe they were uniformed, and obviously it wasn’t normal rush hour conditions, but it was something. Lt. Green definitely heard that we appreciated seeing officers on bikes.

[AFHokie]

@arlrider 96287 wrote:

Today after I took this photo, from a distance and saying nothing, the officer scowled at me as I rode by and yelled “Do you have a problem?!”. I did not say anything or respond. So, this is where we’re at – cyclists being punished for being the victims of collisions, then threatened for documenting wastes of County resources.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6758[/ATTACH]

How exactly did the officer threaten you? I’ll agree he was rude, but I fail to see how yelling “do you have a problem” constitutes an implied or explicit threat.

[peterw_diy]

@AFHokie 96409 wrote:

How exactly did the officer threaten you? I’ll agree he was rude, but I fail to see how yelling “do you have a problem” constitutes an implied or explicit threat.[/quote]

Seriously? Where have you been that you haven’t heard of LEOs improperly harassing individuals for taking pictures? Did you miss the story of Maryland arresting someone and confiscating gear for videorecording an on-duty state trooper? How about the credentialed WaPo reporter arrested for “trespassing” in a McDonalds after videorecording police?

Fair or not, LEOs have a reputation for highly disliking being photographed, and reacting as if they were, to use the FBI Director’s language, “beyond the law.”

[dbb]

[ATTACH]6771[/ATTACH]

Coming late to the discussion but it probably makes sense to understand the jurisdictions, particularly at this location.

The Arlington-NPS property line on the downstream side of Lynn runs through the driveway entrance about 20 feet from the signal pole we wait at before crossing Lynn heading up hill. The attached map shows the line going through a manhole cover. Head closer to the District and you are in National Park Service territory.

The attached map provides more detail.

[DismalScientist]

IMHO, “scowling”(in the OP’s words) when asking when asking “what are you doing?” And doing nothing when the OP bikes by when not answering does not constitute a threat. Perhaps the OP thought that this was the biggest civil rights scoop ever, but perhaps an answer would be helpful in providing cyclist’s perspective.

[Dirt]

@dbb 96419 wrote:

[ATTACH]6771[/ATTACH]

Coming late to the discussion but it probably makes sense to understand the jurisdictions, particularly at this location.

The Arlington-NPS property line on the downstream side of Lynn runs through the driveway entrance about 20 feet from the signal pole we wait at before crossing Lynn heading up hill. The attached map shows the line going through a manhole cover. Head closer to the District and you are in National Park Service territory.

The attached map provides more detail.

Thank you dbb. This is very helpful!

[jnva]

Mount a camera on your bike and you will not be questioned at all. Here is where they were this morning
[ATTACH]6772[/ATTACH]

[arlrider]

@DismalScientist 96420 wrote:

IMHO, “scowling”(in the OP’s words) when asking when asking “what are you doing?” And doing nothing when the OP bikes by when not answering does not constitute a threat. Perhaps the OP thought that this was the biggest civil rights scoop ever, but perhaps an answer would be helpful in providing cyclist’s perspective.

He did not ask “what are you doing?”. He asked “Do you have a PROBLEM?” (emphasis his) while stepping forward towards the sidewalk where i was trying to ride. It was not asked while I was taking the photo but later while I was riding by (the photo was taken from far away). When a man with a gun asks me if I have a problem while starting to move towards me, I consider that akin to picking a fight, and yes I find it threatening.

And @jnva, I too was glad to see the new placement today. I hope that’s a result of a policy, not just one officer that was smarter or more motivated than others have been in the past.

[rcannon100]

@arlrider 96428 wrote:

And @jnva, I too was glad to see the new placement today. I hope that’s a result of a policy, not just one officer that was smarter or more motivated than others have been in the past.

I would suggest that the new placement today was very directly the result of people like you who are willing to step up and call attention to problems. Thank you.

[rcannon100]

@AFHokie 96409 wrote:

How exactly did the officer threaten you? I’ll agree he was rude, but I fail to see how yelling “do you have a problem” constitutes an implied or explicit threat.

It’s well established First Amendment law. It’s called “chilling speech.” Peterw_diy references some of the precedent. And yes, it is quite illegal. Simply stated, LE can take no action to discourage you from exercising your First Amendment rights. The penalties for doing so are substantial. ACLU Information on photography and police.

[DismalScientist]

As far as I can tell, the officer did nothing wrong according to the ACLU piece. He did not stop the OP from photographing, nor stop the OP at all. The “chilling effect” piece says there needs to be threat of legal sanction. I don’t see it here.

[Author]

Replies