By Ingrid Sapona
Toronto’s crime
rate is low and most who live here would agree that the city is safe. But, the
number of pedestrian deaths on city streets is of concern to many. In a
November 24th article, the Toronto Star reported that 34 pedestrians
have been killed on city streets (so far) and the CBC recently reported that more
than 1,100 pedestrians have been hit in Toronto in 2019 (again, as of late
November).
Just under
one-third of pedestrian deaths this year have been seniors. So, last week a
city councilor organized a pedestrian safety event at a mall in her ward. At
the event, Toronto police offered safety tips and handed out reflective arm
bands for seniors to wear when they’re out and about.
When I heard about
the arm bands, I thought “great”. I’m a big fan of reflective strips on
clothing and other items. A few years ago, I started noticing the ways sports
clothing makers creatively incorporate it into things like their logos and on
the edges of garments. Reflective strips are now even used on dog collars and
dog sweaters. I’m grateful every time my car lights cause a reflection that
helps me see a dog or something that I otherwise might not have seen.
The day after the
pedestrian safety event there was a tremendous backlash against the police and
the councilor who organized it. A number of critics – so-called safe-street
advocates – said that giving out the armbands puts the onus on pedestrians and amounts
to “blaming the victim”. The critics said the police should be focusing on
dangerous drivers instead.
By way of background,
I should explain that another big news story this month was a request by Toronto’s
police chief for an extra $1 million to put additional officers on traffic
enforcement. This request came after the release of eye-popping, albeit not particularly
surprising, statistics. Seems that since 2013, when the city stopped having
dedicated traffic enforcement squads, the number of tickets issued dropped
nearly 50% while the number of collisions in the city have steadily risen.
I don’t think
anyone disagrees that Toronto streets are not as safe as they should be. And, there’s
a lot of differences of opinion in terms of what to do to improve road safety. But
the complaints and accusations about the police wasting their time or supposedly
singling out walkers is ridiculous. Toronto has a real problem with road
safety, but neither the responsibility for safety, nor the fault for behavior that
creates dangerous conditions, lies with one group. The onus is on each of us to
look out for our own safety and to behave in ways that aid in making our streets
safe. Indeed, I daresay that outlook is what motivated the seniors to attend the
safety session.
If we follow the
critics’ logic, does that mean we should no longer teach kids to look both ways
before crossing the street? Or what about the idea that if you’re walking on the
shoulder of the road you should be on the side facing oncoming traffic and you
should walk single file. (Of course, I can understand not teaching kids the racist
rhyme we learned to remember that strategy, but shouldn’t we still teach that
advice??)
If anything, I think
there’s more behavior we should be telling pedestrians to avoid to stay safe
on the streets. If there were mobile devices when I was a kid, I’m sure I’d
have been told not to be looking down at the device as I cross the street, or
not to get so caught up in listening to something that I don’t hear cars and
bike riders ringing their bells.
I imagine that
when the police give talks to groups, they focus on advice they think might be
most relevant to those in the audience. Assuming that’s the case, it’s clear
the police figured walking and texting isn’t much of an issue with seniors, but
making sure they’re seen in the dark is. I don’t think that’s unreasonable, do
you? Apparently, at the session the police also reminded seniors of another defensive
walking tactic I observe religiously: make eye contact with drivers before walking
out in front of them. Mind you, it’s getting harder to do that because so many
cars have darkened windows. (Personally, I think darkened car windows ought to
be illegal for just that reason.)
Why would
encouraging people to take personal responsibility be something others
criticize? And how is that victim blaming? The folks attending the safety event
were not victims – they were there because they want to avoid becoming victims.
The only victims I
see in all this were the event organizers and participants who were unfairly
dumped on by critics who seem to think drivers and others on the road owe them
something and who are offended when reminded of their role in reducing risk.
© 2019 Ingrid
Sapona
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home