[sustran] Re: Terrorism, Transit and Public Safety

[Michael D. Setty]

To Mr. Jonathan Richmond, PhD#, the famous Los Angeles "Sextrain"  
sexpert:

Go stuff it up where the sun don't shine, Mr. Sextrain.

You, of all people, have some nerve complaining about "lack of  
analytical quality" on the part of Litman. I refer here to the  
completely irrelevant chapter in your "book" regarding the L.A. Blue  
LRT patronage projections, given that an analysis of why Blue Line  
ridership is now so much higher (76,000/day+ in May 2005) than the  
original estimates would have been relevant, and actually useful  
(though an suc an analysis would destroy the underlying premise of  
your "book").

It's also very interesting that nearly 18 months later, Randal  
O'Toole has apparently chosen to ignore, rather than (to try to)  
definitively debunk, Todd's criticisms of Randal's so-called "Rail  
Disasters" paper, including the 2005 entry. That is because Todd has  
his facts straight, and Randal does not.

And why, OH WHY,  do I have to point out that OF COURSE Todd is not  
advocating waiting for 30 people per month to be killed in transit  
terrorist incidents. Richmond, don't contribute to the image you  
already have of being even more stupid than many of us transit  
advocates suspected, claiming someone said something that he did not!  
Shame on you, Mr. Sextrain. One of Todd's goals was also to wage a  
sort of "preemptive war" on anti-transit extremists, who will  
certainly twist the London transit terror attacks into anti-transit  
propaganda.

Richmond, Todd's point is so obvious only an ideological-driven idiot  
- and academic snob - like you would mischaracterize Todd's point (to  
characterize one of your laments in the book: "...all the professors  
recommend against rail, and WE are THE EXPERTS! But the unwashed  
public and the politicians almost completely ignore us. Sob, sob,  
sob...") People are NOT going to be any safer abandoning transit for  
auto usage because auto usage has a much higher fatality rate. "Why"  
this is so is beside the point in the short term.

We DO know that travel by transit is MUCH safer, as Todd points out.  
Besides, to switch from transit to auto travel because to chase  
fleeting feelings of being "safer" would not only be futile, it would  
be CAPITULATING TO TERRORISM! Certainly London transit users are NOT  
willing to do that, except I suppose those British ninnies quickest  
to startle. But given the propensity to knee-jerk reactions in  
American "culture" (sic), I am uncertain if your type of common sense  
depravation isn't typical of many Americans. I hope not. This is a  
justified fear that I share with Todd.

For the record, major transit accidents, like airline crashes,  
generate headlines BECAUSE THEY ARE SO RARE. And who bloody knows how  
many drivers who die in, or pedestrians in front of, motor vehicles,  
are in fact suicides (I also used to live in a Northern California  
town where every year, there was a large number of retired people in  
rather curious one-car accidents); we certainly know when someone  
commits suicide in a subway station, in front of an LRV, or on a  
railroad track, now don't we?! Anyone interested in or know anything  
about this topic? Mr. Sextrain? The Wikipedia entry is blank and  
waiting at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Automobile- 
assisted_suicide&action=edit

Very sincerely,

Michael D. Setty
www.publictransit.us

# PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper, as my wise Geography professor never  
stopped being delighted to point out. Certainly one proof is  
"Transport of Delight" (sic)

On Jul 8, 2005, at 10:51 PM, Jonathan E. D. Richmond wrote:

>
> We should all roundly condemn the so-called "paper" on "Terrorism,
> Transit and Public Safety" from self-appointed expert Todd Litman.  
> I have
> long known that Litman's work must generally be discounted because  
> of its
> bias and lack of analytical quality. However, it is one thing to be an
> advocate of something you believe in, but it is quite another to  
> cheapen
> the value of life in the wake of a terrible tragedy.
>
> "Terrorism, Transit and Public Safety" is an example of "bait and  
> switch."
> If Litman was selling used cars, he would be in trouble with Canada's
> consumer regulations for such a practice. Of course, many people  
> will have
> been drawn to this paper expecting some insight into the problems of
> terrorism and steps that might be taken to make public transport more
> secure. Instead, the "paper" is a hastily dashed-out piece of  
> advocacy for
> transit.
>
> More than 50 people have been killed and 700 injured in the  
> bombings which
> took place in London. It is unacceptable for even one person to be  
> to be
> killed or injured for reasons of hatred. We have a Jewish saying  
> that "to
> save one person is to save the world," and we all have a shared  
> duty to
> stop terrorism from hurting anyone. There is not a point at which  
> we have
> done "enough" to make the world safe: We must continue our efforts  
> until
> we are sure of success.
>
> And yet, what does Litman do? In his paper (www.vtpi.org/ 
> terror.pdf), he
> gives us a brief paragraph to state that acts of terror have  
> occurred on
> public transport, and then goes straight away to declare that "Yes,
> despite such events, public transit is still an extremely safe form of
> trvel." A chart is shown to demonstrate that public transport fatality
> rates are lower than for car travel. This is doubtless true, yet it  
> is not
> only irrelevant to the particular situation of terorrism, but it  
> cheapens
> life itself when advocacy of this type takes precedence over an  
> analysis
> of how to combat terrorist activity.
>
> The graphs which are used as a tool to indicate cause and effect --  
> if you
> have more transit you have less fatalities -- are likely  
> misleading. Do
> the cities with more transit use have less fatalities *because*  
> people use
> more transit or for other reasons? We simply do not know. It is  
> possible,
> for example, that because the cities with the most public transport  
> use
> are also the most congested, that they have lower traffic speeds  
> than the
> average, and therefore less opportunities for dangerous driving or
> accidents. I don't know whether that is the case, but I do know  
> that the
> simplistic presentation of facts Litman has assembled is designed to
> persuade readers of his cause, not to provide a scientific  
> analysis. Yet,
> is any of this discussion relevant to the issue at immediate hand,
> and which Litman disarmingly uses to bring people to his article,  
> which is
> that terrorism is increasingly putting us all at greater risk, and  
> must
> be stopped?
>
> Next, and most offensively, Litman states that "Transit risks tend to
> receive more attention than risks associated with automobile travel...
> Incidents that kill or injure a few transit passengers often receive
> national or international attention, while automobile crashes that  
> kill a
> few people are so common they are considered local news, and injury
> accidents often receive no media coverage at all.
>
> Overall, transit passengers are much safer than motorists, and  
> residents
> of transit-oriented communities are safer than residents of
> automobile-oriented communities, even taking into account risks from
> murder and terrorism (Lucy, 2002). Terrorists would need to kill 30
> transit passengers every month in the U.S. before transit riders would
> face a similar risk as automobile occupants."
>
> In other words, even if terorism gets worse, Litman argues that  
> until we
> have at least 30 killings a month, people should carry on using  
> transit.
> This is not only deeply insulting and hurtful to those who have  
> just lost
> colleagues, family, and friends, but this cheap sales pitch  
> distracts us
> from our real duty, which is to ensure that everything is done to  
> promote
> safety for both car and public transport users. We should not wait  
> for 30
> people a month to be killed, but we must take instead action to  
> provide
> the security against terrorism necessary to stop killing. In  
> London, this
> requires a complex response, which involves not only improved
> intelligence, security procedures, and policing, but also public
> investment in the underground system because the dilapidated nature  
> of the
> infrastructure and the severe crowding that takes place on trains  
> during
> many hours of the day is itself a contributor to security breaches  
> and an
> increased probability of deaths and injuries in the event of an  
> attack.
>
> And the appropriate response to traffic fatalities is not to simply  
> tell
> people to get on transit, even if terrorism escalates, but to  
> devote the
> needed public resources to provide education to stop such tragedies
> occurring. Since human error is responsible for the vast majority of
> traffic accidents, this implies a need for vastly improved
> driver education that should in fact start with values that  
> children learn
> in school and be continued in a new and reflective form of practical
> instruction that focuses on the responsibility of each and every  
> motorist
> on the road rather than with the teaching of mechanical skills.
>
> So, Todd Litman, shame on you for your cheap advocate statement in the
> aftermath of tragedy. Let us all turn instead to the real problems of
> combatting terrorism and improving safety, with the assumption that  
> each
> and every human life has infinite value and that not even one death is
> acceptable.
>
> And let me add one more thing. Let us not rush to blame Islam for the
> terrible things that are happening in the world, but let us follow the
> example Mayor of London Ken Livingstone has taken and instead call for
> unity in promoting the value of life. Here at AIT we have many Muslim
> students on campus who are quite aware that I am both British and  
> Jewish,
> and I have been quick to send them a message to say that I am well  
> aware
> that Islam is a religion which promotes respect and love for
> all. Those who commit acts of terror are not Muslims, and they  
> pervert the
> word of Islam. Let us bring everyone together, and not allow  
> divisions to
> occur.
>
>                                                 --Jonathan
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Todd Alexander Litman wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> I just completed a paper on "Terrorism, Transit and Public Safety"
>> (http://www.vtpi.org/terror.pdf), in response to the recent bomb  
>> attacks in
>> London, which puts terrorism risks into perspective with other
>> transportation risks. I plan to distribute a press release on it  
>> early next
>> week. I'd greatly appreciate your comments or suggestions for  
>> improving it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Todd Litman, Director
>> Victoria Transport Policy Institute
>> "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"
>> 1250 Rudlin Street
>> Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada
>> Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560
>> Email: litman at vtpi.org
>> Website: http://www.vtpi.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ================================================================
>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people- 
>> centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on  
>> developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history  
>> of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia.
>>
>>
>
> -----
>
> Jonathan E. D. Richmond                               02 524-5510  
> (office)
> Visiting Fellow                               Intl.: 662 524-5510
> Urban Environmental Management program,
> School of Environment, Resources and Development
> Room N260B                                            02 524-8257  
> (home)
> Asian Institute of Technology                 Intl.: 662 524-8257
> PO Box 4
> Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120                        02 524-5509  
> (fax)
> Thailand                                      Intl:  662 524-5509
>
> e-mail: richmond at ait.ac.th               Secretary:  Kuhn Vantana  
> Pattanakul
>         richmond at alum.mit.edu                      02 524-6368
>                           Intl:  662 524-6132
> http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/
>
>

Michael D. Setty
Carquinez Associates
P.O. Box 6076
Vallejo, CA.  94591-6076
(707) 557-7563   (707) 557-6735 fax
msetty at publictransit.us
www.publictransit.us
-- 
Chacun a droit à son propre avis,
mais à non ses propres faits.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan