Living Car Free - Critical Mass

I don't think these people portray cyclists in a positive light. They ride around San Francisco or whatever, taking up all lanes and running red lights, trying to do everything they can to provoke "cagers", then when any driver honks at them, they swarm his car. Here is a video of them swarming the van of an elderly couple and scaring them to death and claming they tried to run them over. The police arrived on the scene shortly after and determined the elderly couple had done nothing wrong and let them go with no charges. The bikers also brought children with them and incited them to cry, which I think is absolutely pathetic. I'm all for encouraging people to drive less, but think just isn't the way to do it.

You be the judge: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8eb_1179125551

a lot o folks out there need a good old fashioned horse-whippin...

Here is the news report: http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/ci_5892254

Here is a video of them swarming the van of an elderly couple and scaring them to death and claming they tried to run them over.
You be the judge: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8eb_1179125551

You may want to fix your link. That one goes to a video that DOES show a van slowly, purposefully, rolling over three bikes while the cyclists try to get the driver to stop rolling over the bikes.


The police arrived on the scene shortly after and determined the elderly couple had done nothing wrong and let them go with no charges.

The same police that have an openly adversarial attitude toward Critical Mass determined that the elderly couple did nothing wrong even though the footage above clearly shows them doing something wrong.


The bikers also brought children with them and incited them to cry, which I think is absolutely pathetic.

Interesting. I watched the video twice and yet never saw the part where the children were incited. At what point in the video did that occur? How many minutes into the video? You're really just claiming that the children were incited in the hopes that people will be predisposed to viewing the Critical Massers negatively, which I think is absolutely pathetic.

Whoa! Relax buddy, no need for the rude tone.

The video was taken by a critical masser and obviously editted before he released it on the net. If you look at the van, you will notice that one second there are no bikes under the van, the next second there are. He clearly editted out the part of how the bikes got there. If the driver had ran them over, the cameraman obviously wouldn't have editted it out. He must've edited it because it showed people intentionally pushing their bikes under there (which is what witnesses on the scene claimed).

One second the van's windshield is fine, and in the next second it's smashed. The part of the video where someone smashed the van's windshield was editted out. Likewise, the children are in their trailer, then the next second they're being held by that person and crying, so obviously someone took them out of the trailer and incited them to cry.

At no point does the video show the driver plowing through bikes, it shows the van with no bikes under it and then the next frame there are bikes under it and people yelling at the elderly couple, who are trying to drive their van off the bikes, but can't because people are swarming the van.

if it was the people in the van's fault i do hope they were sent a bill at least.

They ride around San Francisco or whatever, taking up all lanes and running red lights, trying to do everything they can to provoke "cagers", then when any driver honks at them, they swarm his car.



Love the propaganda.

Lifted F350 with cow catchers, air horns and all the red neck goodies. Feel free to beat on it :D

Why was Dick Cheney driving a van in Berkeley? I guess he wants to be in the vanguard of the Culture Wars.

This was a good old fashioned turf wars. Some motorists believe that they have the right to be unimpeded on the public roadway, regardless of other users. Critical Mass was there to tell them no.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the day when every rush hour looks like a CM ride.

I think everyone on this forum is in agreement that what we want is for people to drive less. Where I disagree with a lot of people is on how to get people to drive less. Some people seem to think that the way to do this is by harrassing drivers and be really annoying by slowing down traffic with ridiculous critical mass events. One would have to be completely ******** to believe that that would make drivers want to become cyclists. All it does is makes drivers hate cyclists even more and strengthens their resolve to not ride a bike.

I think everyone on this forum is in agreement that what we want is for people to drive less. Where I disagree with a lot of people is on how to get people to drive less. Some people seem to think that the way to do this is by harrassing drivers and be really annoying by slowing down traffic with ridiculous critical mass events. One would have to be completely ******** to believe that that would make drivers want to become cyclists. All it does is makes drivers hate cyclists even more and strengthens their resolve to not ride a bike.

well, if you were looking for a good video example of how bad CM can be, that link wasnt it, those people should not have been driving

If you look at the van, you will notice that one second there are no bikes under the van, the next second there are. He clearly editted out the part of how the bikes got there. If the driver had ran them over, the cameraman obviously wouldn't have editted it out. He must've edited it because it showed people intentionally pushing their bikes under there (which is what witnesses on the scene claimed).

Did YOU actually look at the video? Apparently they must have lifted that corner of the van up, put their bikes under the wheel, and set it back down on top of their bikes :rolleyes:

Spaceman Spiff, how do suggest getting more people riding and getting treated like we belong on the road? Please don't waste my time with the old "Same roads, same rights" crap. We have some similar rights, but we don't have the SAME rights. Signalling your turns and obeying traffic lights isn't going to solve our problems any more than critical mass is. I have met, and heard of people who started riding more and joining in on critical mass rides after they saw how much fun they can be. I have yet to meet somebody who took up cycling because they saw somebody riding down the road sticking their arm out as a turn signal.

I wouldn't expect you to actually believe ME though, because I have ridden in several CM rides (Chicago), so I must be a rabid driver who only rides for 2-3 hours on the last Friday of every month trying to stir up trouble right? Ahhhh, I can't wait 'till next Friday though, it's been 5 months since I've been in Chicago, should be a fun ride :D

Anyways, thanks for bringing this fresh new topic up for discussion, I don't think this has been beaten to death yet has it? This is the only response I will make to this thread as I am sick of reading the back and forth bickering on the subject.

I agree that critical mass doesn't really help out the bike-as-alternate-transport cause, but I really don't have much sympathy for the drivers that get caught up in it. I can't tell you how many times I've had the piss scared out of me by cars passing with less than foot of space and at a much greater speed than mine going to and from school, just to save a few seconds of travel time. On the downhill stretch, when I can go at a pretty good clip, I take the whole lane and even then I get tailgated. It's scary, dangerous, and enraging. So, forgive me if I take pleasure in thinking about the same *******s who shave miniscule amounts of time off their commute by putting my life on the line, having to sit in a long line of traffic while cyclists, of all people, clog the streets and force them to delay.

Having said that, the confrontational nature of the ride isn't likely to convert many drivers into bicycle commuters. In fact, it probably makes my commute more dangerous due to the animosity that arises from the ride. If it has to happen every month, I wish that they would restrict it to simply a ride, and not do anything that would make the papers, it's almost embarassing to be associated with the more violent riders who use their bikes to bash in windows.

CM rides, at least the ones I've seen here in Seattle, are totally counterproductive as an advocacy effort. I'm carfree, and I don't particularly like cars, but even I have been really irritated by what I've seen CM do on their monthly rides. Blocking intersections, displaying overt hostility towards motorists, snarling traffic (not just car traffic, either), and gloating as you do so does not put cycling in a positive light, folks. If you think nonsense like this increases respect for bicyclists, then you have absolutely no conception of human nature or of common sense. If you want people to consider bicycles as serious transportation, the cyclists themselves need to act like responsible adults.

Counterproductive is a good way to describe it, I agree

I have friends who take part in SF Critical Mass and ironically DRIVE AN HOUR to get to it. They mostly just go to have a good time and cause some ruckus.
Its no longer about the viability of bikes, its about civil disobedience and being a "rebel"
I've always refused to take part. I spend my advocacy time and effort in city politics and volunteering my time for constructive community programs

As I posted in a similar thread in one of the other forums, California law is very specific in cases such as what is depicted in the video. Whether the cyclists were in the right or wrong is of no consequence, whether they were doing something illegal or not is of no consequence and whether their 'demonstration' was productive or counterproductive is of no consequence. The motorist violated California law.


At intersections without STOP or YIELD signs, slow down and be ready to stop. Yield to vehicles already in the intersection or just entering it. - source: California Drivers Handbook


A green light means “GO” but first give the right of way to any vehicle, bicyclist, or pedestrian in the intersection. If you are turning left, make the turn only if you have enough space to complete the turn before any oncoming vehicle, bicyclist, or pedestrian becomes a hazard. Do not enter the intersection if you cannot get completely across before the light turns red. If you block the intersection, you can be cited. source: California drivers' handbook.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/pgs16thru17.htm#intersections

The motorist clearly knowingly and wilfully attempted to run over other vehicles and if the police did not press charges with such evidence, they were negligent in their duty.

It could simply be the case that Critical Mass in San Francisco is worse than it is in other cities, and that it's been hijacked by some extremist hippies. After all, San Franciscans have always been a bit crazy. If a CM event happened near me, I would probably participate in it just to see what it was like. If it turned out that many people were causing trouble then I would dissassociate myself from it and never participate again, but if it went peacefully without trouble then I would participate again.

In Chicago, CM seems to be a pretty positive force. It definitely doesn't feel like any kind of protest here, nor advocacy, it just feels like a community bikeride. Last week a teacher brought all of her foreign students to it, and they seemed to really like it.

It is not completely free from controversy though, they do cork the occasional intersection in the big masses if they feel they need to to be safe, so im sure some people would wish they would stop doing that. You also get the drunk rowdy crew being loud and annoying sometimes. But, even that hasnt caused many real issues in a long time.

I know 5 or 6 people who rode their bike for the first time in years and years to check out a CM, and now are regular or semi-regular bike commuters!

This video made me angry. These cyclists are idiots.

edit: "cyclists"

Troll.

a lot o folks out there need a good old fashioned horse-whippin...

These folks avoid the south for a reason, we still have regions where "They needed killin'" is a legal defense.

Troll.

And your post added so much to the thread.

And your post added so much to the thread.

How about this thread is a can of worms opened that belongs in A&S along with the rest of the weekly scheduled CM arguments there?

The video was taken by a critical masser and obviously editted before he released it on the net.


Editing can occur for many reasons, including removing footage where nothing of interest happens. However there is no editing in the section where the bikes are ran over.



If you look at the van, you will notice that one second there are no bikes under the van, the next second there are. He clearly editted out the part of how the bikes got there. If the driver had ran them over, the cameraman obviously wouldn't have editted it out. He must've edited it because it showed people intentionally pushing their bikes under there (which is what witnesses on the scene claimed).
<snip>
At no point does the video show the driver plowing through bikes...

At 1 minute and 14 seconds into the video there are several people and bikes directly in front of the van. The van begins moving forward onto the bikes. The camera pans to the driver and then back to the front of the van as it comes to a stop on the top of all three bikes at 1 minute and 28 seconds. No cuts in the footage during that sequence.



One second the van's windshield is fine, and in the next second it's smashed.


True. At 1:37 we see the windshield unbroken. Footage is cut at 1:42 and then at 1:47 the window is broken. The CM'ers aren't required to incriminate themselves. I'm sure they broke the window. While that may be wrong of them, if someone intentionally drove over my bike, they'd better hope that demolishing their car distracts me long enough for them to sneak away.



Likewise, the children are in their trailer, then the next second they're being held by that person and crying, so obviously someone took them out of the trailer and incited them to cry.


Still need a time stamp on this one. At 0:30 I see a child trailer, but that is before the incident and there's no telling if that particular trailer has any kids in it. At 3:09 I see the kids, but no trailer, and they are already crying. At 4:23 the kids appear again, at the side of the road, after the CM'ers were moved over there to wait. I didn't see any footage of the kids in the trailer, not crying, prior to 3:09. When was that?



...no need for the rude tone


Simply matching the tone of the original post.



How about this thread is a can of worms opened that belongs in A&S along with the rest of the weekly scheduled CM arguments there?


I agree wholeheartedly.

There are aspects of CM that I like, and aspects that I don't, but I find it ridiculous that whenever there is any confrontation or altercation involving them, people automatically assume that the CM'ers are at fault. I'd expect that on an automobile board, but on a bike board, WTF!?!

There are aspects of CM that I like, and aspects that I don't, but I find it ridiculous that whenever there is any confrontation or altercation involving them, people automatically assume that the CM'ers are at fault. I'd expect that on an automobile board, but on a bike board, WTF!?!

I don't think people automatically assume that CMers are at fault whenever there is an altercation between motorists and bicylists during a CM event. People look at the evidence, and then, more often than not, decide that CMers are at fault, because, in the vast majority of cases, CMers are actually the ones that provoked a confrontation. Do that sort of thing often enough, and you develop a reputation. CM might be a postive force for bicycling in some places, but in my experience, they're not.

And, just to be clear, you don't automatically deserve admiration just because you're on a bunch of bikes all at once; if you act like a critical mass of confrontational, immature jerks on a regular basis, you're not going to get the respect you think you deserve, not from the public at large, and not from most other bicyclists, either.

The whole situation was set up to be a disaster. I dont know what exactly is going on behind the scenes but it really looks like the cyclists are inciting the incident. I will second the opinions of others who have said that this kind of display doesnt do anything to get people out of cars and onto bikes. If anything, it just furthers the attitude of people who see bikes a nuisance because of the people riding them and not the other way around.

The cyclists should be cited. The driver(s) should be cited. Everyone should go have a cup of tea and reflect.

As I posted in a similar thread in one of the other forums, California law is very specific in cases such as what is depicted in the video. Whether the cyclists were in the right or wrong is of no consequence, whether they were doing something illegal or not is of no consequence and whether their 'demonstration' was productive or counterproductive is of no consequence. The motorist violated California law.

What?? Laws don't matter? Where do you live, the State of Confusion?




- source: California Drivers Handbook

source: California drivers' handbook.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/pgs16thru17.htm#intersections


According ot the police, the driver DID stop.


The motorist clearly knowingly and wilfully attempted to run over other vehicles and if the police did not press charges with such evidence, they were negligent in their duty.

Well, if laws don't matter, like you said in the first paragraph, then the cops still did the right thing, they pinned the blame on the a**holes.

What?? Laws don't matter? Where do you live, the State of Confusion?




According ot the police, the driver DID stop.



Well, if laws don't matter, like you said in the first paragraph, then the cops still did the right thing, they pinned the blame on the a**holes.

That's quite the presumption that I inferred laws son't matter. In fact, I stated quite the opposite and ony creative jumping to conclusions would suggest otherwise.

The point I was making is that the motorist was required by law to remain at a stop when blocked by other vehicles, whether the other vehicles were blocking it legally or illegally. By moving forward, even slowly, and purposefully running over the bikes, the motorist commited a far greater act of violence than merely blocking traffic. Had the police not had contempt for the CM-ers, the motorist would have been charged with several offences. The motorist, the CM-ers who commited traffic infractions and the police should all be held accountable for their actions...and negligence.

All the same, I hope they pull their head tubes from their seat tubes and get a clue about what their so called demonstration is actually accomplishing for the rest of us. :)

I don't agree with the CMers, but regardless of whose fault it is, drivers have to be held to a higher standard than cyclists.

Drivers are in the posession of deadly force, cyclists are not. A broken windshield isn't going to result in anyone dying, but slowing inching forward a car when you don't know what might be around or under the car could.

Just goes to show that automobiles are unsafe at any speed, even 1 mph.

Id like to see theses Critical Mass rides in Compton,Watts, or Crenshaw.......try surrounding someone who will fight back or shoot you......thats entertainment. its easy for a bunch of ******* to bully and old couple.

I've seen that video & if I were the handicapped elderly couple I would have ran over the bikes, backed up & ran over them again. Those arrogant assh*^*$ deserved having their bikes crushed.

Well, time to lock down this thread! I guess there must be a full moon tonight!