From a messenger website.....

[-=£em in Pa=-]

From MESSNYC.net..........

In Praise of Riding Like a Jerk.

Written by BillDozer

Here at MESS, it's our interest to bring all bicyclists in the urban setting together. And we want not only to bring us together with a cry of unity, but to celebrate the differences that make the city the great American melting pot that it is. On this note, however, I have reached an impasse. There is a division among city cyclists that cuts me to the heart, and I feel the difference is nearly irreconcilable. I'm talking, of course, about commuters versus messengers. This difference is most analogous to the political differences between liberals and radicals. Now, in my last blog, I wrote about how being a bicyclist doesn't make you a revolutionary. I still believe that to be true, but I also believe that riding your bike a certain way can make you like a revolutionary. Like revolutionaries, those who ride their bicycles for work are often operating not so much against the law as outside of it. Whether against or outside the law, they operate in opposition to liberal ideology.

The modern liberal philosophy is based, like the conservative philosophy, on faith in the general goodness of the law, and therefore of the state. Liberals believe that by adjusting the law to make it more fair, the society as a whole can be forced to become more egalitarian, and thus move closer to the democratic utopia of organic food co-ops, ethnically diverse neighborhoods, and large corporations who treat workers well and pay their taxes. In short, making the whole world one giant college town. Likewise, commuters and "cycling advocates" work within the law to make cycling more safe in the urban setting. A noble pursuit, to be sure. They are concerned deeply for the respect of law that all vehicle operators, motorized or not, should carry with them. They generally expect nothing less than strict obedience to the traffic code. This includes stopping at all traffic control devices, riding or driving ONLY in the appropriate lanes, signalling for all turns or adjustments in behavior. If there is a conflict between the necessity to perform an illegal action and the commuter's on moral outlook on rule of law, the liberal commuter will make his/her own commute more difficult, and address the city by legitimate means to make his or her travel more safe and convenient at some eventual date. Failing to respect the rule of law would result in anarchy*. That, of course, would be bad.

The radical philosophy has little respect for the law. "The law doesn't respect me, so why should I respect the law?" is a common mantra. It is the belief, well-founded many would say, that the rules of the game are made by and for the winners, and the only way to escape is to play a different game. Similarly, the bicycle messenger is interested in accomplishing a task in the most efficient way possible. The outlook is that liberty, not order, is the more important of virtues. This often conflicts with the rule of law, which necessarily prizes order over liberty. A messenger will almost certainly violate the rule of law in order to accomplish a task, if it is in his/her interest. Ninety percent of the time (estimated), this infraction occurs without incident, and without any sort of victim. "So," the messenger asks,"what's the harm?" It is an "ends-justifies-the-means" outlook without a doubt. But following the letter of the law would result in longer travel time, less efficiency, and therefore lower pay. There is also the issue of comfort with the street, and total knowledge of yourself and your bicycle. This is something that a messenger, who spends 40-plus hours per week on his/her bike, has in much greater quantity than the commuter, who generally spends 20 hours per week or fewer on his/her bike. This philosophy may seem immature to the liberal/commuter, but on the flipside, the liberal philosophy seems naive to the radical/messenger. The radical sees trust in the state or law as trust in an absentee father. One who doesn't really care, but throws little trinkets at you to feign some sort of caring relationship. It's just not worth the effort to reciprocate.

One other, and I feel most important, dividing issue of these ideologies is trust, and the watching of backs. The stardard liberal line that I learned from living in Portland, Oregon for four years, is such: Liberals believe that all people should always watch out for each other. Nothing wrong with that. However, it is often carried out to the belief that liberals EXPECT all people to be watching out for others, thus reducing the requirement for one to look out for one's self. Here's an example. Two cyclists are riding in a bike lane on a busy stretch of downtown street. A speeding car approaches from behind and on the left, only to make a right turn, cutting off the two cyclists. One cyclist, expecting that the driver saw him, doesn't notice until it is too late and is forced onto the sidewalk, screaming and cursing at the driver. This rider presumed, foolishly, that the driver not only noticed the cyclist, but was interested in the cyclists safety - moreso than the driver's concern for his/her own convenience. The other cyclist, upon hearing the accelerating car, expects that the car would pull some dickhead maneuver, just like a driver would. He/She instead slows down, cuts into traffic to pass the offending automobile on the left. This cyclist, although in violation of the law, continues on his/her merry way. If you live in a city, with thousands or millions of other inhabitants, you should never, ever expect anyone in a car to be watching out for you. Drivers, as a rule, do NOT see you as traffic. And no matter what the law says, they will never see cyclists as the same as them. This is rude, pushy America, where cars rule and cyclists are second-class. Traffic laws, even those regarding bicycles, are written in the interest of cars and car drivers. Until we have our own streets, like those in Europe, it will always be that you are playing the car's game on the car's turf. The law will never legitimately change that.

*personally I find it quite hilarious that even very intelligent people will confuse anarchy - "without a leader" and anomie - "without order," but that's just my own little aside.

[bennyk]

If the author's point is that you should be aware of car traffic that may right hook you, I just wasted 5 minutes reading that article. This really does not need to be said.

[-=£em in Pa=-]

I got waaaaay more out if it than that ! :eek:
I see that the post is not getting too much interest but I
thought it was very thought provoking because it was from NYC,
a brutal riding environment as Im sure you know and offers a point
of view that I never see mentioned here outside the usual Bike Lane-VC-
Helmet- 'you are wrong, I am right stuff ' that is 95% of the posting
here.

[randya]

Actually, I believe it's from and about Portland, it's only posted on an NYC messenger site.

[-=£em in Pa=-]

^^^ Ok, my bad...I see Portland mentioned but because I pulled it from
a new NY based web site I assumed the Portland stuff was Past tense ?
Did you see Blumenauer on Steven Colbert ??? Good stuff !!

[bennyk]

I got waaaaay more out if it than that ! :eek:
I see that the post is not getting too much interest but I
thought it was very thought provoking because it was from NYC,
a brutal riding environment as Im sure you know and offers a point
of view that I never see mentioned here outside the usual Bike Lane-VC-
Helmet- 'you are wrong, I am right stuff ' that is 95% of the posting
here.

Yeah I was being a dick, there's much more to his argument, but cycling safely and reasonably doesn't really have anything to do with the division between messenger culture and the other "amateurs" who ride.

The whole messenger elitist thing is kind of frustrating, but I guess that happens in any profession that is parallel to something regular people do. In my profession, we talk sh!t about people who don't do it for a living also.

My reaction to the article is that it doesn't matter whether someone is a messenger pro or not, it's always our responsibility to cycle reasonably and to watch out for ourselves, and that should really speak for itself.

[Roody]

Personally, I do very well "playing the car's game on the car's turf." Some people just like to make everything seem more difficult and dangerous than it really is.

[bennyk]

Personally, I do very well "playing the car's game on the car's turf." Some people just like to make everything seem more difficult and dangerous than it really is.

:rolleyes: Amateur.

[chicbicyclist]

Well, if you want to disrespect other people, don't be surprised if they are being a dick to you in response.

[Bekologist]

I'm always confused by 'professionals' that don't wear helmets or gloves and run a lot of red lights while riding bikes with 1 gear and no coasting ;) seems kinda 'amateur' to me when I see it, regardless of anyone getting paid to ride.


Oh, i run a fair share of red lights, ride wrong way, curb hop, etc..... but i can't help but chuckle at some of the 'pros' I see out there on the streets and sidewalks.

I also reserve some humor for the vehicular cyclists ignoring lane splits to get stuck in traffic.

However, I have no scorn for anyone with the steely eyed determination to use a bicycle as a transportation device, and subscribe strongly to the solidarity of the wheel.

[Roughstuff]

Oh, i run a fair share of red lights, ride wrong way, curb hop, etc..... but i can't help but chuckle at some of the 'pros' I see out there on the streets and sidewalks.

I also reserve some humor for the vehicular cyclists ignoring lane splits to get stuck in traffic.

However, I have no scorn for anyone with the steely eyed determination to use a bicycle as a transportation device, and subscribe strongly to the solidarity of the wheel.

Not sure "pro's" is the word i'd use, as much as idiots, imbeciles, and a**holes. The few times i've seen bike messengers at work (usually in big cities, which i scrupulously avoid) I always end up muttering. Too bad that the rudeness of such a visible few confounds the decades-long effort by riders to demonstrate courtesy and professionalism en route to our goal of being respected on the roadways.

roughstuff

[bandregg]

The people who work as bike messangers are just like any other group of people. A large number of them work in a law abiding way and without all of the bluster and bragging. A smaller number feel that part of their personality is tied up in the job and the image. This second group is invariably the louder presence. I've found that this holds true for chefs, bike messangers, computer programmers, and even flight attendants. So, take the calls for revolution and insistence that theirs is the only way to survive for what it is, the words of one person working in a job that thousands of people do.

[RobertHurst]

Not sure "pro's" is the word i'd use, as much as idiots, imbeciles, and a**holes. The few times i've seen bike messengers at work (usually in big cities, which i scrupulously avoid) I always end up muttering. Too bad that the rudeness of such a visible few confounds the decades-long effort by riders to demonstrate courtesy and professionalism en route to our goal of being respected on the roadways.


If you spent more time in cities you would realize that messengers operate in a manner that, while outside the written law, is generally courteous to fellow citizens, respects right-of-way, and is thus sustainable. Ignoring the traffic code, they adhere quite consistently to the underlying codes of conduct in the cities where they work. Otherwise, there would be no messengers.

Also, how do you know the riders you are seeing are messengers? There has been a huge boom in ersatz messengers on the streets in recent years. Of all the riders I see on fixed gears, with messenger bags and all the rest, about one third of them are actual working messengers.

Robert, messenger

[SamHouston]

He doesn't need to spend more time in cities to learn the dangers of baseless generalizations. Anyone can help him with that. Most messengers operate within the confines of the traffic code. You only see the ones that don't, IME around 10% give or take by city.

[noisebeam]

Here's an example. Two cyclists are riding in a bike lane on a busy stretch of downtown street. A speeding car approaches from behind and on the left, only to make a right turn, cutting off the two cyclists. One cyclist, expecting that the driver saw him, doesn't notice until it is too late and is forced onto the sidewalk, screaming and cursing at the driver. This rider presumed, foolishly, that the driver not only noticed the cyclist, but was interested in the cyclists safety - moreso than the driver's concern for his/her own convenience. The other cyclist, upon hearing the accelerating car, expects that the car would pull some dickhead maneuver, just like a driver would. He/She instead slows down, cuts into traffic to pass the offending automobile on the left. This cyclist, although in violation of the law, continues on his/her merry way.

Uhhh lots of words and not much said.
Basically the example sums it up: If one rides like a 2nd class road user, one will be treated as such. If one rides according to vehicular rules of road (pass on left), one will fare better. Unfortunately the writer of the articles presumes themself as 2nd class, otherwise they would not consider merging into traffic and passing on the left a d-head manuever.

but all that crap about lawbreaking, mess vs. com experience, etc is garbage. there are folks who remain idiots who spend hours doing the same thing over and over again. everyone can break a law if they want, sometimes it does buy one some time, but its not a sure thing. some drivers find they get faster by speeding and running reds, or going the wrong way here or there, big deal.

Al

[comradehoser]

Roughstuff is just being tuff again.

I think he just needs to go back and revisit his record collection for a while.

REO Speedwagon is punk rock, rite?

Air Supply Lives!

[comradehoser]

RobertHurst ^^^^+1

messengers (elitism aside) are, above all, pragmatic cyclists, because they have to be. They use what works--including fixies.

Liberals, on the other hand, work from ideologies that tell them the way the world and people are *supposed* to behave, and work to engineer from there. They also tend to become very haughty and cross when the world/other people don't behave "as they should." If you want a case study of liberalism at work, look no further than this forum right here.

[slagjumper]

I think that BD is troubled by the fact that we cyclists do not act as one, and therefore we cannot facilitate more effective change, quicker. To an extent this is correct. I see the gist of his argument, but would put it more like this--

On one side you have the messengers. They can be characterized as young, not in possession of much cash, self dis-enfranchised and have little respect for the cars and the laws that obviously side with motorists. They tend to be radicals, and they act in chaotic ways in an attempt to change things now.
The messengers are closely aligned with the more artsy and politically inclined anarchists, mostly because they are in the same age set.

On the other side you have the commuters. They are professionals, and office workers and tend to be older. They have more money and are more likely to have dependants and are more likely tied economically to “the system”. These folks tend to be liberals, do gooders if you will. If something is “unfair” a liberal might complain about it or even act to do something to change it.

While these groups can appear as opposite as night and day, they have much in common and both could greatly benefit from cooperation. Both messenger and commuter could benefit by having less cars on the roads that they use. Both could benefit by having favorable tax laws applied to their daily fuel saving activities. Both could benefit by having more cyclists join their ranks, more driver awareness and better designed facilities. The list could go on and on.

So what do these groups bring to the table? The messengers/anarchists bring huge numbers of devoted, hardworking, politically motivated bodies, loud voices and a compelling sense of theatrics. This group has a lot of free time to get the word out and live the carfree life.

The commuters are mostly inside the system. Their jobs might be in government, the arts, medicine, or law. They probably are not writing off their full-IRS-allowable 10% of money given to charitable organizations. They too believe that they can change the world, but that it takes a long, well thought out plan to do it.

Many commuters were more like today’s anarchists in their youth, than they would readily admit. Both sides have opinion leaders and followers. Both are somewhat idealistic and likely to shop at the local co-op. So what is the problem?

Building the consensus---
So what is keeping these groups from acting more as one? On one side you have grey hair, goofy spandex wearing, store-built bike riding commuters, and; On the other side you have the tattooed, un-perfumed, ear-plugged, butt- tattooed, home-built bike riding messenger-anarchists.

My point is that we do not have to assimilate into melted goo to be a whole lot more effective. All that we really need is to understand where the other is coming from, agree to work together, and be willing to compromise to make things better for biking. I would not want to see a fellow messenger or anarchist injured no matter if it is by their own choice or not. I am not going to tell someone what to do unless it directly affects me physically or they ask for an opinion, (and really want to hear it). I don’t want to see some 40 or 50 or 60 something getting all up in a tizzy about what a 20 year old is choosing to do with their riding technique-- it is of no concern to me.

What is a concern is that if we do not start working together now, gas is going to rule all of our lives even more than it does already. There are going to be more cars, more expensive fuel and food, more smog, more time in traffic, less for our kids and our country. If we don’t come to grips with our differences and move on, both groups will have lost.

Finally I have made many generalizations in this post. All messengers are not anarchists, and many people who I might call anarchists would not self identify as such. I also left out conservatives. Where do you all fit into this? Are you drinkin' with or against us?

[-=£em in Pa=-]

Slagjumper
:beer:

RuffStuff
:roflmao: <=== Your kidding, right ?

[Brian Ratliff]

Uhhh lots of words and not much said.
Basically the example sums it up: If one rides like a 2nd class road user, one will be treated as such. If one rides according to vehicular rules of road (pass on left), one will fare better. Unfortunately the writer of the articles presumes themself as 2nd class, otherwise they would not consider merging into traffic and passing on the left a d-head manuever.

but all that crap about lawbreaking, mess vs. com experience, etc is garbage. there are folks who remain idiots who spend hours doing the same thing over and over again. everyone can break a law if they want, sometimes it does buy one some time, but its not a sure thing. some drivers find they get faster by speeding and running reds, or going the wrong way here or there, big deal.

Al

You either did not read it, or read it with an agenda. It was probably the latter. Your post is "case in point" to the object of the OP. Even your vocabulary: 2nd class vs. ...what, 1st class? Garbage? Idiots?

My point is that this is not an article about what to do, but rather an article about what the problem is. The problem is similar to the problem we have on this board regarding the hardliners vs. the relativists, when it comes to cycling style. The problem is an impass. Each feels threatened by the other, and so we spend time pulling each other's hair, instead of addressing the underlying problems.

The point of the article is that while messengers, perhaps, underestimate the importance of law and order, commuters (and by extention, mainstream cycling lobbyists) underestimate the depth of experience of the messenger and what their experience can bring to the discussion. We commuters believe we are all hot shots when we ride a bike for 30 minutes twice a day, from home to work and back. Yea, we might not own a car and we can feel all proud of that and all. We might even do our errands from our bike. Because of this, we think we are the Advocates of Cycling and we know all there is to know about cycling in traffic.

But even the most hard core of us have experiences which pale in comparison to a messenger. A messenger might spend more than 40 hours a week on the streets, in traffic. He's figured out how to run a red safely, and it is obvious to him; intuitive. To us commuters, we think like the drivers: "how'd he do that?" and "how in the world can that be safe?" And, of course, a little side of "why can't I do that?" envy. While we commuters can show what ought to be done, the messengers show us what can be done. There is value in that.

[noisebeam]

You either did not read it, or read it with an agenda. It was probably the latter. Your post is "case in point" to the object of the OP. Even your vocabulary: 2nd class vs. ...what, 1st class? Garbage? Idiots?

Of course I read it and got that point - I just think the article did a poor job of making the point. 'garbage', agreed, a bit to strong, but poorly written, yes.

About the example. It talked about one cyclist being foolish and passing on right. I agreed, but was making the point that it doesn't take 40hrs/wk to figure this out and that just the attitude alone that passing on the left is 'illegal' and/or 'd-headed' shows that even this cyclists think they shouldn't do it, but do because they are 'outside' the system, which in this particular case, they were not.

(maybe you read too much into my use of 'idiot', not refering to any one type of cyclist or even cyclists at all and that where the article used the term 'foolish' I used for variety 'idiot,' maybe you didn't read the article well enough to realize I got the use of '2nd class' from the article itself)

Al

[slagjumper]

I can see why the bike-interest anarchists in my city, simply go out and do stuff rather than talk or argue about it. While they may be a headless political body, they get the job done. Some examples: They organize rides to fund raise for books for prisoners, do a bike give away/earn thing called free-ride and help to organize Pittsburgh’s Bikefest. While I probably have more ideologically in common with these folks, I’d support L’s or C’s as well, but they don’t do anything.

Face it, liberals and conservatives, there are many non-traditional bicyclists out there who are very effective advocates. They are devoted, energetic and smart. While they do not have the demographic WWII-sex babyboom-advatage of the hippies, they are a force to be reckoned with.

To poo poo their activities because somebody on a bike runs a red light is vacuous and ill informed.

[-=£em in Pa=-]

You either did not read it, or read it with an agenda. It was probably the latter. Your post is "case in point" to the object of the OP. Even your vocabulary: 2nd class vs. ...what, 1st class? Garbage? Idiots?

My point is that this is not an article about what to do, but rather an article about what the problem is. The problem is similar to the problem we have on this board regarding the hardliners vs. the relativists, when it comes to cycling style. The problem is an impass. Each feels threatened by the other, and so we spend time pulling each other's hair, instead of addressing the underlying problems.



Another great post !!!
And I have to agree with what you say, Brian because I am part of the
problem. I am part of the impass as are most people here.
I think VC'ers create a bad / arrogant / antagonistical impression of cyclists to
the public and VC'ers will think I make cyclists look weak and 2nd class by not commanding
my space. Wrongway and sidewalk riding type stuff aside, I believe there is no right and
wrong on most of this stuff, though. Whatever makes you feel the most safe and comfortable
while riding is whats good for you.

[galen_52657]

I certainly have never felt threatened by sidewalk cyclists, bike lane advocates or cyclists who abuse traffic control devices and signage. Running a stop-sign or traffic light is not all that dangerous if one slows, looks and finds an opening and proceeds. Ridding against traffic flow is way more dangerous even if one factors out the chances of being struck. The simple fact of doubling the force of impact alone should one get hit by a car head-on make wrong-way riding not the smartest thing to do. I am willing to bet that messengers have a very low accident rate. And that is because most of the time they spend mixed in with motor traffic, riding in a semi-VC sort of way. Some just take liberties when the opportunity presents itself.

Mostly what I feel for sidewalk cyclists is a sense of sadness because though the may feel safer on the sidewalk, they are in fact less safe.

I also feel sad for bike lane advocates. Sad, because they are willing to be spoon-feed a half-arsed solution which is in fact, no solution at all. It may look good and make you feel good but that does not translate into being good for cyclists.

[Brian Ratliff]

I also feel sad for bike lane advocates. Sad, because they are willing to be spoon-feed a half-arsed solution which is in fact, no solution at all. It may look good and make you feel good but that does not translate into being good for cyclists.

Funny that. I feel the same way about those who cannot think past bike lanes equaling bike gettos and being spoonfed the wide outside lane solution as the best amongst horrors. It may sound good and the logic certainly sparkles in the sun, but it does not translate into being good for cyclists.

[Roughstuff]

If you spent more time in cities you would realize that messengers operate in a manner that, while outside the written law, is generally courteous to fellow citizens, respects right-of-way, and is thus sustainable. Ignoring the traffic code, they adhere quite consistently to the underlying codes of conduct in the cities where they work. Otherwise, there would be no messengers.

Also, how do you know the riders you are seeing are messengers? There has been a huge boom in ersatz messengers on the streets in recent years. Of all the riders I see on fixed gears, with messenger bags and all the rest, about one third of them are actual working messengers.

Robert, messenger

Ahhhh....indeed, your second paragraph might be the clue! Maybe the rest are just crazy riders, albeit with some pannier bags carrying who knows what. Do old-time messengers lament the arrival of crazy newbies?

Still i detect a bit of janus-face here. On the one hand riders messengers boast about how cool and hot (:)) they are but as soon as ya call 'em on the way they ride and the style of riding they hold so dear, all of a sudden they are these law abiding citizens and its onky a frisky fringe who spoil it for everyone.

As I said, it is true that I don't spend alot of time in big cities, so i am not there to see all messengers all the time. I have seen, however, two spectacular collisions between balls-to-the wall messengers and a pedestrian in a crosswalk. One was in Boston, one was in Springfield Mass.

All I could think ---"well, too bad. Thirty years of courteous, professional riding (going back to the Bikecentennial days of the 1970s) out the window. "

roughstuff

[Roughstuff]

Roughstuff is just being tuff again.

I think he just needs to go back and revisit his record collection for a while.

REO Speedwagon is punk rock, rite?

Air Supply Lives!

Dammit when are they gonna have an "Olivia Newton John Night" on American Idol? I wanna see Chris Daughty get physical! :)


roughstuff

[galen_52657]

Funny that. I feel the same way about those who cannot think past bike lanes equaling bike gettos and being spoonfed the wide outside lane solution as the best amongst horrors. It may sound good and the logic certainly sparkles in the sun, but it does not translate into being good for cyclists.

I agree that wide outside lanes are not a cyclists panacea. They are a stop-gap measure as are bike lanes. Until metropolitan areas construct Euro/Asian-style 12' wide bicycle boulevards without parked cars on one side with cyclist-first traffic controls on both sides of every major thoroughfare I believe the WOL concept is superior to bike lanes for several reasons:

1) Motorists will not expect cyclists to be in 'the bike lane' if there is none to be in, thus reducing backlash against cyclists.
2) Occasional motor traffic driving close to the curb will keep this area clean.
3) Costs the municipality less for striping and maintenance.
4) Does not foster a false sense of security to noob cyclists
5) Is easier for cyclists to merge into traffic for left turns
6) Is easier for cyclists to position themselves to the left of right-turning vehicles

In closing, I don't like half-arsed systems. But, if you are gonna have a half-arsed system, I would want the more flexible half-arsed system.

[noisebeam]

I am part of the impass as are most people here.

I think VC'ers create a bad / arrogant / antagonistical impression of cyclists to
the public and VC'ers will think I make cyclists look weak and 2nd class by not commanding
my space. Wrongway and sidewalk riding type stuff aside, I believe there is no right and
wrong on most of this stuff, though. Whatever makes you feel the most safe and comfortable
while riding is whats good for you.
1. I debate here and may be seen as part of the problem here. But let me assure you in the real world I am always in support of other cyclists and varying needs.
2. There isn't a right and wrong. What concerns me about the 'illegal' cycling is not the folks who do it for a job, but those who do it cause they don't know any better. Where I live illegal driving does not benefit a cyclist, motor vehicles are always faster and it it the rare intersection that one can run a red on and due to layout (long distances between intersections) running a red won't make a meaninful time difference. Yet many cyclists here still drive illegally and do things that are more dangerous that don't provide any real benefit, safety or time wise. This is in contrast with those who break/bend rules/laws and actually gain a benefit, such as doing a job faster or/and avoiding gridlock traffic.
Al

[Brian Ratliff]

In closing, I don't like half-arsed systems. But, if you are gonna have a half-arsed system, I would want the more flexible half-arsed system.

Bingo. I suspect this sediment is behind most of the WOL advocate's arguments.

[Brian Ratliff]

1. I debate here and may be seen as part of the problem here. But let me assure you in the real world I am always in support of other cyclists and varying needs.
2. There isn't a right and wrong. What concerns me about the 'illegal' cycling is not the folks who do it for a job, but those who do it cause they don't know any better. Where I live illegal driving does not benefit a cyclist, motor vehicles are always faster and it it the rare intersection that one can run a red on and due to layout (long distances between intersections) running a red won't make a meaninful time difference. Yet many cyclists here still drive illegally and do things that are more dangerous that don't provide any real benefit, safety or time wise. This is in contrast with those who break/bend rules/laws and actually gain a benefit, such as doing a job faster or/and avoiding gridlock traffic.
Al

So... leave the law breaking to the professionals? But the criticism from commuters is aimed at messengers who are professionals and who do gain from breaking the law.

[noisebeam]

So... leave the law breaking to the professionals? But the criticism from commuters is aimed at messengers who are professionals and who do gain from breaking the law.
I say look the other way if proffessionals do it (not that it is condoned, but law enforcement can engage if they want) and let them figure out if they collectively want this or not. (i.e. if hypothetically every messenger didn't break laws it would level the playing field)

I've never once critisized a messenger for 'bad behavior'. I have no reason to as I don't believe there are any in metro-Phx.* and if there are then I'm sure the most effcient ones will tend to ride according to the rules of the road.

*If anyone can prove otherwise, I'd like to know about it.

Al

[galen_52657]

Bingo. I suspect this sediment is behind most of the WOL advocate's arguments.

No No.......... sediment is what is deposited over bike lanes after a good rain...

Definition:

1. settled matter at bottom of liquid: material, originally suspended in a liquid, that settles at the bottom of the liquid when it is left standing for a long time


2. eroded material: material eroded from preexisting rocks that is transported by water, wind, or ice and deposited elsewhere

sentiment is what old cyclists feel for Campy down-tube friction shifters and derailleur tickling a corn-cob 6 speed freewheel...(number 5)

Definition:

1. mental feeling: a thought or idea based on a feeling or emotion


2. general feeling: a feeling or opinion prevailing among a group of people
The sentiment emerged that we were acting too soon.


3. underlying feeling: an underlying feeling, as distinct from the action that it brings about
His speech was awkward, but the sentiment was real.


4. appeal to feeling: a calculated appeal to feeling or emotion, especially one that is excessive and unreasoning
The book ends on a note of cheap sentiment.


5. deep feeling: refined or tender feeling, especially when expressed in a work of art ( formal )

[Brian Ratliff]

I've been there on a trip one time. I doubt bike messengers would make sense. Too spread out.

[Brian Ratliff]

Okay fine, sentiment. My grammer no well. My speling no well nether.

[noisebeam]

I've been there on a trip one time. I doubt bike messengers would make sense. Too spread out.
I've done a fair amount of searching on line, in yellow pages, on local boards (out of curiousity, not looking for work) for messenger services that use pedal bikes. Of the few I've found they all use cars.

Al

[SamHouston]

Ahhhh....indeed, your second paragraph might be the clue! Maybe the rest are just crazy riders, albeit with some pannier bags carrying who knows what. Do old-time messengers lament the arrival of crazy newbies?

Still i detect a bit of janus-face here. On the one hand riders messengers boast about how cool and hot (:)) they are but as soon as ya call 'em on the way they ride and the style of riding they hold so dear, all of a sudden they are these law abiding citizens and its onky a frisky fringe who spoil it for everyone.

As I said, it is true that I don't spend alot of time in big cities, so i am not there to see all messengers all the time. I have seen, however, two spectacular collisions between balls-to-the wall messengers and a pedestrian in a crosswalk. One was in Boston, one was in Springfield Mass.

All I could think ---"well, too bad. Thirty years of courteous, professional riding (going back to the Bikecentennial days of the 1970s) out the window. "

roughstuff

Golly Beav, didn't Ward tell you it isn't too punk rock to make up stories and post them on the internet?

I'll paypal you $25US if you can produce a bicycle messenger in Springfield MA without digging up the bones of a turn of the century Western Union child labourer. (You aren't that old are you?)

not too rough...around the ol brainpan

edit: naturally that challenge is only open to "roughstuff"

[sbhikes]

So messengers are the liberals and anarchists of the urban cycling crowd and commuters are the conservatives. Oh my god! I'm on the wrong side!

[SirMike1983]

The post oversimplifies both cycling in cities and politics in order to form the analogy.

But as a general point ignoring traffic signals makes a somewhat dangerous situation where bicyclists are often run over even more dangerous. How often is it that cars simply floor it when the light turns green, rather than checking to make sure the intersection is clear then going? Run a red light and they'll never see you because they're not looking. Ignoring traffic signals outright is just not a good idea for anyone.

[Roughstuff]

Golly Beav, didn't Ward tell you it isn't too punk rock to make up stories and post them on the internet?

I'll paypal you $25US if you can produce a bicycle messenger in Springfield MA without digging up the bones of a turn of the century Western Union child labourer. (You aren't that old are you?)

not too rough...around the ol brainpan

edit: naturally that challenge is only open to "roughstuff"


Gee pops maybe I've been wearing my Chinos too tight! Wally tells me he has never seen a guy my age with a floating crotch. :)

He was a cyclist, he had two delivery style panniers on the back, had a clipboard hanging off his belt with what sure looked like an invoice of some sort, and sure looked in a damn hurry to get someplace fast. He was bruised up pretty bad (didn't seem to care too much about the pedestrian so much, though) and was limping for a while ere he got back on the bike, which was also a bit demented.

I have to ask myself your same question. A bicycle delivery guy in Springfield, Mass? MAybe he was just an idiot. Most people in the crosswalk probably wouldn't give a rats ass about the distinction.

roughstuff

[chicbicyclist]

Actually, shbikes, I think the commuters are the liberals and the messengers are the anarchists(libertarians?).

[Treespeed]

Not sure "pro's" is the word i'd use, as much as idiots, imbeciles, and a**holes. The few times i've seen bike messengers at work (usually in big cities, which i scrupulously avoid) I always end up muttering. Too bad that the rudeness of such a visible few confounds the decades-long effort by riders to demonstrate courtesy and professionalism en route to our goal of being respected on the roadways.

roughstuff

It's always funny when folks who can't even handle riding in the "big city" have opinions about how one should make a living riding in one. Rough you really need to lose the "Punk Rock Lives" under your avatar as you sound more like my Grandmother than any old punk that I've ever met. You avoid the cities so why should you care how people ride in them.

As far as courteous riding goes until you've had to ride as a way of feeding yourself and not just to blab about it on in the internet you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Go down to your local messenger company and work for a whole week, not just a day, rain or shine and see how quickly your courtesy goes out the window. Until you've had to cross a whole city in 5 minutes in the pouring rain to make a deadline filing you should stick to your country bike lanes and leave the real riding to the professionals. :D

[slagjumper]

I guess things really are not that bad for the US cycling community. If it where all of these different groups would have no issue bonding together to join fight for bikes. Turns out there are only a few baseball battings a year. Since things are realitivly calm, we just bicker off on the edges of the world about bike lanes, messanger young-hero bad boys and "anarchists".

If I where GW, I'd just start a new program that gave 100,000,000 to new bike facilities, IF more then 50% of cyclists would agree on a particular set of solutions. If there was no 51 percent, we would give the money to Ford and Exxon so that they could decide our fate. Guess who would get the money?

This all reminds me of the wierd psych film that I saw in Psych 101. There where two players who controled 2, one-way trucking routes, the test subjects would get a buck for every load they brought back to their side. They could talk and say anything to each other. Only trouble was that each player choose to block the other player's truck and so no body got anything.

[chicbicyclist]

As far as courteous riding goes until you've had to ride as a way of feeding yourself and not just to blab about it on in the internet you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Go down to your local messenger company and work for a whole week, not just a day, rain or shine and see how quickly your courtesy goes out the window. Until you've had to cross a whole city in 5 minutes in the pouring rain to make a deadline filing you should stick to your country bike lanes and leave the real riding to the professionals.

I'm sorry, I love messenges and all(in fact, I think they are cool), but come on, this argument is a bit stinky. It was your choice to do it for a living and if the pay is bad....well.....I guess if you really love something alot you'll have to suck it up....but at the end of the day, its still your choice....

[SamHouston]

Gee pops maybe I've been wearing my Chinos too tight! Wally tells me he has never seen a guy my age with a floating crotch. :)

He was a cyclist, he had two delivery style panniers on the back, had a clipboard hanging off his belt with what sure looked like an invoice of some sort, and sure looked in a damn hurry to get someplace fast. He was bruised up pretty bad (didn't seem to care too much about the pedestrian so much, though) and was limping for a while ere he got back on the bike, which was also a bit demented.

I have to ask myself your same question. A bicycle delivery guy in Springfield, Mass? MAybe he was just an idiot. Most people in the crosswalk probably wouldn't give a rats ass about the distinction.

roughstuff

More imaginary details, way to go roughstuff. Collisions are very rare, just like with other cyclists. You should have just claimed to have seen a bunch of messengers running red lights, that'd be believable at least. There are all sorts of problems with our industry without having to lie just because you made a foolish statement about a large group of people. I still say you made that up, both incidents.

How about $500 to the Bicycle Messenger Emergency Fund in your name if you can substantiate your claims at all?

Or you can just withdraw your assessment that all bicycle messengers are this that and the other. You know a lot of the pollution you breathe even all the way out there in the country is from the cities, from the car pollution, cities where men & women in that industry take more cars off the road per worker than anyone else except transit workers. I guess we should all hang it up because a small percentage of workers identify with a rebellious punk rock mindset, which puts all of us in a bad light among people who accept perception as reality.

[Roughstuff]

Rough you really need to lose the "Punk Rock Lives" under your avatar as you sound more like my Grandmother than any old punk that I've ever met. You avoid the cities so why should you care how people ride in them.

Hehh! Now there is an idea. I have granny gears galore, so maybe a granny moniker would be appropriate. Do they have multi-speed rocking chairs that I can put on the porch?



Until you've had to cross a whole city in 5 minutes in the pouring rain to make a deadline filing you should stick to your country bike lanes and leave the real riding to the professionals. :D

Thank you! I will. And the same to you: enjoy the city with its 'rude motorists.' I am sure in any confrontation with a rude motorist, the law of natural selection will take care of you and your buddies at the messenger company.

roughstuff

[Roughstuff]

I'm sorry, I love messenges and all(in fact, I think they are cool), but come on, this argument is a bit stinky. It was your choice to do it for a living and if the pay is bad....well.....I guess if you really love something alot you'll have to suck it up....but at the end of the day, its still your choice....


What? An inner city liberal take responsibility and suck up the consequences of the choices they have made? Nah...please!!!!

roughstuff

[huhenio]

While in traffic, I do everything that I can get away providing I am not disrupting anyone's trajectory ...

[Treespeed]

What? An inner city liberal take responsibility and suck up the consequences of the choices they have made? Nah...please!!!!

roughstuff

What? A crotchety hick conservative go five minutes without whining about big city liberals, please!

What you forget Grandma is that the companies that hire messengers expect results and messengers deliver. If there wasn't a need for such services they would die out. And as far as natural selection I did eight years and am still here to tell the tale.

[JohnBrooking]

Okay, I didn't read the whole article or any of the comments beyond the first few, but as far as I got, I think he's exaggerating both positions.

(1) People who obey the laws generally don't obey all of them to the letter as he implies. (Anyone here who makes a complete stop at a stop sign even when you can see down all directions way in advance and no one's coming, raise your hands. How about sitting all by yourself at a car-activated left-turn light until a car comes to trigger it for you?) In my book, the reason for obeying traffic laws is not out of respect for the law as an abstract entity, but out of respect for my own safety. It's just generally more safe to obey the law than not. It's practical, not ideological.

(2) Bike messengers as radicals standing in opposition to the establishment? Well, who are they delivering things for? Umm.... capitalist corporations? Ding ding ding! Sorry, you can't escape the system that easily!

I think these are just two straw men he set up in order to knock them down. It smacks of a narcissistic manifesto. (Or am I just being grumpy? :) )