Advocacy & Safety - A couple of critical mass defenders requested

http://sntjohnny.com/smf/index.php?topic=2363.msg40844;topicseen#msg40844

I don't think I know enough about it to defend it adequately.

I just started looking into to this Critcal Mass thing and I will agree that you should never need a permit to gather in a public place or organize a ride. The whole permit businness is just a way for the government to control groups it does not agree with.

Also, this "corking" thing is common on large motorcycle rides and even though it's technically illegal people should learn to tolerate a group that is just trying to stay together. I'm also sure most of the motorists who end up in a confrontation are *****holes who see somebody doing something they don't like and feel compeled to prove that they have the right of way.


That's about all the good I can say for Critical Mass. Frankly the whole thing feels like a bunch of anti-establishment anarchists trying to skirt the edges of legality to mess with people that just want to go on about their day and get where they're going.

There's a type of person who will follow a cause for no reason other than to rebel against the majority. Even if you suddenly gave them whatever they wanted they just find something else to ***** about. Example:

Liberal, "Damn McDonalds, huge corporation, making millions turning people into fat slobs. I know I'm right and I'll force the world to understand!!"

God, "Henceforth, in accordance with your every wish McDonalds will now be Fat Taxed to a rate which forces it out of business."

Same Liberal some time later, "Damn Government, always telling us what we can and can't do with own bodies."


I've never been to a Critical Mass ride, but the movement feels this way to me. Perhaps I'll go to one and see what it's all about. But if there are cyclists out there deliberatley antagonizing motorists it upsets me greatly. This is certainly not the way to get people to respect cyclists.

While no one deserves to be run over by a car (methinks - wait - mehopes - the author is penning his own version of Modest Proposal), the best I can say for critical mass is that they're a bunch of *****holes. I can neither condone nor defend their tactics.

Question: do Critical Mass operations block bicycle traffic as well?

Paul

Question: do Critical Mass operations block bicycle traffic as well?

Paul


yes

Question: do Critical Mass operations block bicycle traffic as well?

Paul

yes, and pedestrian traffic, and any unfortunate person in a vehicle,often with violent results (see attack on children and mom in minivan)

You have to look where this article comes from - some christian discussion board - which I'm sure is making lots of friends with statements like:

"....in a bastion of sodomy such as San Francisco where natural family and affections are so despised..."

I'm sure he makes friends very easily.

I don't agree with the attack on the van, but if we pooled together every incident where a car "attacked" a cyclist we would get a better feel for who the greater evil is.

technically a car by itself is incapable of attacking anyone, as it is only an object. The driver of said object on the other hand........

From the article:

"Those I am referring to are protestors and self-appointed revolutionaries thinking that they are so important and much more better than you that they somehow have the right to literally bring your life to a screeching halt to...."

I wonder if he feels the same way about politicians who shut down blocks and blocks of city traffic wherever and whenever they make campaign stops. Did Karl Rove's motorcade block any traffic I wonder? Does the author feel the same about police funerals when hundred of black and whites bring normal traffic to a halt? Would he have the guts to say so in the same in your face style on a police forum? It's easy to criticize CM (don't get me wrong, I think CM could use some criticism) but let's apply the same standards to everyone.

Makes me wonder if a Critical Mass ride ever intersected with another competing march/demonstration... and if so, what happened.

That's about all the good I can say for Critical Mass. Frankly the whole thing feels like a bunch of anti-establishment anarchists trying to skirt the edges of legality to mess with people that just want to go on about their day and get where they're going.

There's a type of person who will follow a cause for no reason other than to rebel against the majority. Even if you suddenly gave them whatever they wanted they just find something else to ***** about. Example:

Liberal, "Damn McDonalds, huge corporation, making millions turning people into fat slobs. I know I'm right and I'll force the world to understand!!"

God, "Henceforth, in accordance with your every wish McDonalds will now be Fat Taxed to a rate which forces it out of business."

Same Liberal some time later, "Damn Government, always telling us what we can and can't do with own bodies."

.......Then you step down off of your pedestal to offer :


I've never been to a Critical Mass ride, but the movement feels this way to me.

:rolleyes:

yes, and pedestrian traffic, and any unfortunate person in a vehicle,often with violent results (see attack on children and mom in minivan)


After all the info that came out about this, you would still post this ??

Its going to be a real shock when you find out the earth isnt flat......

:rolleyes:

After all the info that came out about this, you would still post this ??

Its going to be a real shock when you find out the earth isnt flat......

:rolleyes:

Just because someone is on a bike when they do something does not make an otherwise wrong act right.

"The thing of it is, what they have to say probably isn’t worth considering all that much in the first place."
How open minded of him :rolleyes:
I'd rally like to go sometime and observe firsthand. I'm sure there are alot of hooligans there making trouble just for the fun of it. From reading over wikipedia (the source of all knowledge ;)) it seems harmless enough in it's roots and the guys in NYC at the bike store seemed to think it was a great thing and told me I had to come down but I never got hte opportunity :(
I'd love to see them stop and make way for an ambulance if they ever encountered the issue to shut down that crappy argument against it. It does sound pretty disruptive though but if it wasn't it would just be a weekend gorup ride.
Maybe I'll try and start a critical mass ride with all the commuters in double oak :D

It does sound pretty disruptive though but if it wasn't it would just be a weekend gorup ride.

Every one Ive attended had the vibe of a friendly community group ride, not really a protest or statement. Where a lot of people who are normally too scared to ride their bike in the street came out. Seen very few incidents of pissed cars and 99% drivers actually seem to be supportive, cooperative, and helpful. Seems like its usually just seen as a community event.

Certainly doesn't seem like its like this everywhere or every time though if you believe the news, but I havnt seen the ugly side first hand yet. I havnt done a SF mass either though, which is where most of the news seems to come from.

Fredrick Meekins, looks like a nutbag to me...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Frederick+Meekins&btnG=Google+Search

After all the info that came out about this, you would still post this ??

Its going to be a real shock when you find out the earth isnt flat......

:rolleyes:

THE EARTH IS'NT FLAT????? :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Again, I think you have to look at where the CM rides take place as well. Here, we "mass" about 20 riders, everybody rides two abreast when a passing lane for vehicles is available, and single file when there's night. Nobody engages in a confrontational driver or pedestrian ever. I think the mob mentality kicks in when the masses get big in the metropolitan areas. I think much of what occurs in those rides are not in congruence with the original intentions of the thing...

Just because someone is on a bike when they do something does not make an otherwise wrong act right.

Thank you. :)

Where do A&S people find all these forums? I doubt you saw a link to that thread on your local news channel, is that a forum you actually visit regularly?

I keep seeing these threads in A&S linking to sites full of ignorant, bigoted, hateful people, and it makes me question the type of people that post in A&S. Are they the same people that visit these sites?

I went on my first critical mass last week here in Salt Lake City. It's been a very long time since I had that much fun on a bike. Now, that said, I will also say I am uneasy about doing it again. Yes, motorists need to be made aware of bikes. But in this day of road rage and lunacy, I don't think we're doing solo bicyclists any favors when we go out en masse, and give the finger to the man. And some just take it too far.

I must say, some motorists at least got it, honking and waving, whatever. The majority just looked pissed off, as we screwed up traffic even worse, during rush hour, on a friday.

I want cars to respect me, the way I respect them. And while I enjoy Critical Mass, I can't agree with some of what we do. If I decide to keep going with it, I hope I can influence some change among my peers.

Simply put, a lot of motorists hate cyclists. And this attitude we have in Critical Mass only reinforces that attitude in many people.

And I sound like a damn hippie. Group hug. Sing Kumbayah or something.

Your wish is my command.......
http://www.tradebit.com/filedetail.php/1129952

at least a small sample of it!:D
I went on my first critical mass last week here in Salt Lake City. It's been a very long time since I had that much fun on a bike. Now, that said, I will also say I am uneasy about doing it again. Yes, motorists need to be made aware of bikes. But in this day of road rage and lunacy, I don't think we're doing solo bicyclists any favors when we go out en masse, and give the finger to the man. And some just take it too far.

I must say, some motorists at least got it, honking and waving, whatever. The majority just looked pissed off, as we screwed up traffic even worse, during rush hour, on a friday.

I want cars to respect me, the way I respect them. And while I enjoy Critical Mass, I can't agree with some of what we do. If I decide to keep going with it, I hope I can influence some change among my peers.

Simply put, a lot of motorists hate cyclists. And this attitude we have in Critical Mass only reinforces that attitude in many people.

And I sound like a damn hippie. Group hug. Sing Kumbayah or something.

:D Must be the worst version of the worst song ever.
ROFL

:D Must be the worst version of the worst song ever.
ROFL

Yeah, well, it was free.......:p

Sorry, I just couldn't resist!

The guy is clearly a nut job; he has a Masters in Christian apologetics, yet writes this:

"Had the driver decided to role over these delinquents, he should have been given a medal"

The rest of it is seriously misguided as well, don't waste your time.

I have ridden in critical mass more than 10 times. The turnout has ranged from over 100 to 3. My motivation for participating the first couple times was originally to "get revenge" on all the drivers that had passed me at high speed within inches, cut me off, pulled out in front of me from stop signs while making eye contact, etc. I figured they were ruining my day at least once a week, often much more, so I felt entitled to ruin their day once a month. Besides, if you drive everywhere, you get stuck in traffic anyway, so what difference does it make if it is bicycle traffic or automobile traffic?

After witnessing a couple rather disturbing instances of road rage during various CMs (ie a nutjob in a lifted truck with a Semper Fi sticker crumpling a guys bike and a woman attempting to plow into the mass), I decided the way the whole thing usually operates in our city is stupid. When the turnout is large enough, people "circle" intersections for a full light cycle or two. This just pisses people off, and when I go on a 'bike ride' I want to ride my bike, not ride in circles in the most dangerous place for a bicycle to be. I think most of the antagonization comes from this practice. When I do go to CM (I still do most of the time) I pull ahead of the group and wait for all the dumbasses to quit circling. I see absolutely nothing wrong with corking intersections so that everyone can get through. I also see no problem with having a non-permitted bike parade once a month. I think all the critics wouldn't be whining so much if it was cars or motorcycles doing the same thing. ****, the tourists basically do the same thing on the weekends (driving out into the intersection when the light is turning red, blocking everyone else with the green light).

Why do I still go? Frankly, its fun to take part in a spontaneous gathering of somewhat likeminded people and ride bicycles and thumb your nose at the man a little. Most of the people are pretty cool too. There is usually a pretty diverse crowd, dirty crusty punks on tall bikes, commuter types on hybrids with dayglo reflective vests and helmet mirrors, hessians on BMXs, fixed gear hooligans like me, old hippies on cruisers, downhillers, silly folks on pixie bikes, the occasional unicyclist and everyone inbetween. You get to meet a lot of interesting people you normally wouldn't get to interact with. Riding with a group is fun too, usually I ride solo so it's nice to mix it up. I also enjoy the tail end of the rides, when all the fairweather troublemakers have gotten tired of their once a month bike ride and leave. Usually whoever is left at this point goes to a beach or park or bar to hang out and drink/ smoke blunts.

I definately agree with what bobbyahines said about the mob mentality getting out of hand in big masses. I live in a college town, so the rides are either tiny or nonexistent during the summer months. The summer rides are usually the most fun and well recieved as well as the most well-behaved. This july's CM was the best I have had the pleasure of participating in: it was only my roommate, her boyfriend and me. We rode up to a beautiful outlook and watched the fog roll in across the bay over beer and joints.

Based on my experiences, the mob mentality incited by a few people who are trying too hard and the simple vulnerability of bicycles to 3,000+ pound automobiles are the only things that are wrong with CM, at least in my town. People should realize that the roads do not exist simply for the immediate gratification of gas or diesel powered automobiles; they are open for any vehicle to use (thats right, bikes are vehicles too). Since the majority of people probably will never figure this out until the oil dries up, I don't see what is wrong with asserting my right to be on the road ONCE a month and have a little fun whilst asserting.

There I tried.

Pirate, thanks for that thoughtful, balanced analysis. :beer:

Thanks.

I would just like to clarify that CM is different from city to city, and making a judgement on CM as a whole based on experiences in one place is shortsighted. In some places it might really be a problem that can cause tension between cyclists and motorists with bad results, but where I live it isn't really a big deal. People in cars get angry and agressive sometimes, but for the most part it seems to be a minor annoyance for the drivers. I have never experienced a backlash against cyclists in the days following CM, and I ride a lot (my only transportation). Also, people participate in CM for different reasons and those reasons can change over time; drawing conclusions on all the participants based on a few is, as I mentioned before, shortsighted.

I was interested in the original text referred to in the first post. I did a quick search and found out the women was Susan Ferrando. She claims she just tapped a bicycle's rear wheel....

Bicycle advocates, however, said today that Ferrando did more than tap the bicyclist, and that the incident occurred toward the end of the ride, when there were just a few dozen -- not thousands -- of bicyclists in the area, as Ferrando claims. Bicycle Coalition executive director Leah Shahum said witnesses told her that Ferrando "recklessly accelerated" into a crowd and hit the bicyclist so hard the bike was lodged under her vehicle.

That would make me mad too.

Funny how the poster did not mention that the incident started when the driver of the mini van hit a bicyclist and ran over his bike, in a move that onlookers thought was deliberate. Selective editing of the truth, so as to wage a moral argument against groups they dislike, is a common tactic of the right wing in the USA: As it is of most religious nuts and fascists world wide.

Another report said:

According to several witnesses at the scene, however, the minivan driver "revved and swerved into the bicyclists, and tried to flee after hitting one. Bicyclists surrounded the vehicle while calling 911 to prevent a hit-and-run. One [hooligan] bicyclist smashed the rear window." And unlike the description given in the Chronicle editorial, by 9 p.m. the "Critical Mass" dwindles down to only a couple dozen riders -- hardly enough to create huge traffic jams, and certainly much less of an obstruction than that created by the regular automotive traffic.

It's horrible that this cyclist smashed the van's window with children inside. It's also horrible that this Mother committed assault and attempted hit-and-run with her own children in the van. From tonight's update of the story (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/04/BAGLRP2LEI8.DTL), the driver "recklessly accelerated into a crowd and hit the bicyclist so hard the bike was lodged under her vehicle." When somebody tries to kill you, then tries flees the scene, it's understandable why the cyclists got a little hot.


Was it right to physically attack the van, NO. Did the incident get out of hand, yes. But I would point out that there are lots of times when traffic incidents get out of hand, normally between car drivers and other car drivers. We don't condemn all car drivers because some of them get road rage. We should not condemn all bike riders, or even all people who ride a Critical Mass ride, just because of one incident like this.

That this incident has been twisted and blown out of proportion by the right wing blogs and websites is a shame. Some think that because the victim, the person she hit with the mini van, did not press charges and was apparently able to make their own way home, that no crime was committed by Susan Ferrando. That is just wrong. Suggesting that she is an angel of goodness because she had children in the car is also wrong headed thinking.

Both sides were wrong. She was wrong to try to drive through the bike ride. She was wrong to hit the cyclist. It's not as if she was un-aware that she had driven into the middle of a ride. At least one of the cyclists was wrong in taking their anger out on the rear window of the van.

What is also wrong is people condemning others by association, and then advocating violence towards them. By saying that left wing hippies on bicycles should be run over, or by saying that all republicans in hummers and SUV's should be crucified, the speaker is showing their own true prejudices.

To show my own prejudice, I think we should be proactive. Instead of putting up little white crosses by the road side to commemorate another squashed pedestrian or cyclist, we should use bigger crosses by the road, and on them crucify the drivers who run over bikes, as a warning for the other drivers to give us room.

Both sides were wrong. She was wrong to try to drive through the bike ride....It's not as if she was un-aware that she had driven into the middle of a ride. I thought the "point" of Critical Mass is that "Bikes are a part of traffic too." Are you suggesting that bikes are not a part of traffic?

I went on my first critical mass last week here in Salt Lake City. It's been a very long time since I had that much fun on a bike. Now, that said, I will also say I am uneasy about doing it again. Yes, motorists need to be made aware of bikes. But in this day of road rage and lunacy, I don't think we're doing solo bicyclists any favors when we go out en masse, and give the finger to the man. And some just take it too far.

I must say, some motorists at least got it, honking and waving, whatever. The majority just looked pissed off, as we screwed up traffic even worse, during rush hour, on a friday.

I want cars to respect me, the way I respect them. And while I enjoy Critical Mass, I can't agree with some of what we do. If I decide to keep going with it, I hope I can influence some change among my peers.

Simply put, a lot of motorists hate cyclists. And this attitude we have in Critical Mass only reinforces that attitude in many people.

This is precisely why I don't at all approve of CM: my bike is my only form of transportation, and I don't appreciate it when a group of people takes it upon themselves to piss off the larger community in the name of bicyclists everywhere. It reflects poorly upon me, a lone bicyclist who's only trying to go get groceries, and then I have to deal with a motorist who remembered being corked last Friday night and is still irritated at all bicyclists, even though I myself am totally innocent. I've witnessed CM rides a couple of times, and, in Seattle at least, they're little more a celebration of assh*le behavior on two wheels. They're the bicycling equivalent of rednecks on meth in pickups.

I do not think that most motorists hate cyclists. However, I am convinced that any motorist who has suffered through a CM ride likes bicyclists a lot less than they did before. CM does nothing at all to promote bicycling as a serious form of transportation.

I thought the "point" of Critical Mass is that "Bikes are a part of traffic too." Are you suggesting that bikes are not a part of traffic?

No, I am stating the fact that she was fully aware that she was in the middle of a group of cyclists and therefore not covered by the usual drivers get out of jail free magic spell of "I did not see them."

She was in bicycle traffic, and admits that she knew it, but still managed to hit the rear end of the bike in front of her and knock the rider off.

The incident clearly started that she rear ended a cyclist in her rush to get to a birthday party. It is also apparent that she then attempted to leave the location of the accident. That was what apparently enraged one or more of the cyclists.

I am not trying to justify anybodies actions in what subsequently happened. What I am pointing out is the way that stories about this incident have been cast as a pack of mad anti-establishment bikers out to terrorize children.

Critical Mass is not urban terrorism, just like the 1960's civil rights movement was not a communist inspired civil war.

The resulting incident was unfortunate, and bad press for the bicyclists, but I don't see a similar outrage against motorists when they are involved in a hit and run. Hit and run is a cute way to say assault with a deadly weapon and fleeing a crime. Yes, if the person was a regular group rider then a few people in the bicycle community moan about the loss of another cyclist but normally the reaction is one inch of news print in the local news under the police reports section.

Unknown motorist hits cyclist and flees, normal news, almost too common and uninteresting for anyone to comment on. Cyclist breaks car window, Oh my god! The communists are coming! Anarchist taking over the city, hide your women and children.

If all American youth could look forward to fulfilling jobs, with 5 weeks of vacation, socialized health care, and could trust a benevolent, god backed government to look out for their rights, there would be no need for CM.

Instead there is the tyranny of the oil economy. This requires that all upwardly moving US citizens choose, of their own free, will to spend at least 66.66 a month on gas. And preferably spend at least 666 dollars per month on a car. The oil economy dictates that we maintain our oil supply at all costs, even if the stewards of our county say that it means endeavoring in expensive, morally problematic wars.

Bikes only cause a tiny amount of delay in the transportation infrastructure. Mostly delay is caused by over utilization. There are too many cars for the roads. Rather than crashing into CM cyclists’, as Frederick Meekins suggests, perhaps motorists should start slamming into gas stations, other speed impeding vehicles like school busses, tractors and old folks’ cars. It is important to point out that CM does not advocate this behavior, but it seems to follow logically from Mr. Meekins' argument. Every year nearly 1000 bike-martyrs in the US, pay the ultimate price for the simple act of riding their bicycles around cars. Tens of thousands are seriously injured in car-bicycle accidents. These are republicans, democrats, Christians, white and black men and women, little girls and boys we are talking about. Let's not forget the 40,000 martyrs who die in car accidents, perhaps you know one or two. Did they die in vain?

Our world is filled with so much hot air. People often blow up at each other, yelling their arguments, distorting reality, science and scripture. That is why it is good to see the rag tag CM out there. Don’t let their simple clothing, unorthodox methods, or unkempt hair fool you. They may appear weak when compared to the oil-impregnated powers that be, but they delivering a powerful message. They are showing the lost the way out. Surely the actions of a few of the over rambunctions participants can be set asside. CMers are not sitting in their armchairs and spinning verbose tails about how they are correct, or in support of their political interests. They have taken to the streets to spread the word. CM is holding up a mirror to the world, and saying do you like the way it is? Do you like spending 80 hours a year in your car? Do you like spending thousands on cars and gas, just to earn a living? If one sheep waiting for CM to pass decides to drive less, the whole movement is a success. As for the lost, those who insist that car culture be protected, or that cars are necessary for happiness, or those too lazy to make a change, we are not responsible for their self destructive choices and consequent societal impact.

Now it is up to the lost, to heed the prophets of CM, and turn away from their evil ways and get on a bike. Choose life over enslavement to the oil powers, if for no other purpose then to regain the moral high ground and a few thousand bucks to boot! We live in America, even if we are not all Americans, so let's stand together and make a better place to live. We could build cities and lifestyles that would be the envy of the world and we will have earned the blessings of the great deity, too. So brothers and sisters, please, wipe the filth of oil from your eyes and off of your hands and join us in new life, we will accept you with open, loving arms and praise. For you too will have mightaly rejected the evil ways of darkness and stepped into the light.

http://sntjohnny.com/smf/index.php?topic=2363.msg40844;topicseen#msg40844

I don't think I know enough about it to defend it adequately.

Don't bother. His anti-bike attitude looks like the least of his faults. It'd be like wasting your energy trying to convince Hitler to recycle.

The guy is clearly a nut job; he has a Masters in Christian apologetics, yet writes this:

"Had the driver decided to role over these delinquents, he should have been given a medal"

The rest of it is seriously misguided as well, don't waste your time.

I would hardly be the one to defend CM and I won't.

But if you want a start ask how he feels about the students in Tienamen (sp) square. Or are protesters only cannon fodder when they protest against his point of view?

Personally I think if anyone takes the kind of action where they run over protesters (except out of fear, desperation or physical limits (there have been cases with trains where the protesters were not bright enough to know how long it takes a train to stop)) then they are in the same class as those driving those tanks.

I do not want to be part of that class of person and do not want any assiciation with those who are willing to give valid cause for themselves to be included in that group.

Selective editing of the truth, so as to wage a moral argument against groups they dislike, is a common tactic of the right wing in the USA: As it is of most religious nuts and fascists world wide.Interesting you should mention that. My visceral reaction to the current Supreme Court is one of disgust at the half-truths, distortions of meaning, and tortured logic employed to reach the results they want.

And that is also exactly how I feel about Critical Mass defenders.

I said above that I appreciate Pirate's post, and I do appreciate it, because it's an honest and unbiased report and analysis. That is refreshing to read in the age of spin.

What's not refreshing to read is half-truths intended to paint a motorist who gets caught up in the violent aspects of Critical Mass as the "bad guy":


No, I am stating the fact that she was fully aware that she was in the middle of a group of cyclists and therefore not covered by the usual drivers get out of jail free magic spell of "I did not see them."

She was in bicycle traffic, and admits that she knew it, but still managed to hit the rear end of the bike in front of her and knock the rider off.

The incident clearly started that she rear ended a cyclist in her rush to get to a birthday party. It is also apparent that she then attempted to leave the location of the accident. That was what apparently enraged one or more of the cyclists.Whoa. First, you have at least one fact wrong. She was leaving a birthday party, and driving a car full of girls home from the party.

Now let's back up. You are painting a picture here that seems to be a "selective editing of the truth." A woman is driving a car full of girls home from a birthday party. She approaches the tail end of a Critical Mass that is "winding down." According to your account, she decided, while driving a car full of girls home, to run down a cyclist and then drive on, for no apparent reason. And that just doesn't square with what anyone outside of Critical Mass has seen: Riders who aggressively attempt to block the right of way of any motor vehicles on the road, riders who deliberately and intentionally antagonize motorists, riders who use their bikes and their bodies to surround motorists and prevent them from proceeding. Kind of like this:


Suddenly, Ferrando said, her car was surrounded by hundreds of cyclists.

Not being from San Francisco, Ferrando thought she might have inadvertently crossed paths with a bicycle race and couldn't figure out why the police, who she had just passed, hadn't warned her.

Confusion, however, quickly turned to terror, she said, when the swarming cyclists began wildly circling around and then running into the sides of her Toyota van.

So let's look at the possibilities. 1) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, and thought it would be cool to run a cyclist down; 2) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, and inadvertently and unknowingly tapped a cyclist during the confusion that ensued when she got caught up in a Critical Mass ride; 3) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, and the swarm of cyclists deliberately blocked her way, preventing her from proceeding, when she inadvertently tapped one of them; 4) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, when a CMer who was deliberately attempting to block her path threw himself into her path and got tapped.

Now, if it was a hit and run of a CMer who contributed in no way to the collision, presumably the CMer would have wanted charges brought. But no, he apparently didn't want charges brought:


When the alleged bicycle victim was approached, however, he said he wasn't hurt. He also refused to give his name or any other information.

Then, after a few swear words, the alleged victim took off on his bike while the rest of the crowd continued to yell at both the cops and the van.Hit and run victim, or "selective editing of the truth"?

I know what my gut tells me...

Now let's back up. You are painting a picture here that seems to be a "selective editing of the truth." A woman is driving a car full of girls home from a birthday party. She approaches the tail end of a Critical Mass that is "winding down." According to your account, she decided, while driving a car full of girls home, to run down a cyclist and then drive on, for no apparent reason. And that just doesn't square with what anyone outside of Critical Mass has seen: Riders who aggressively attempt to block the right of way of any motor vehicles on the road, riders who deliberately and intentionally antagonize motorists, riders who use their bikes and their bodies to surround motorists and prevent them from proceeding.



So let's look at the possibilities. 1) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, and thought it would be cool to run a cyclist down; 2) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, and inadvertently and unknowingly tapped a cyclist during the confusion that ensued when she got caught up in a Critical Mass ride; 3) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, and the swarm of cyclists deliberately blocked her way, preventing her from proceeding, when she inadvertently tapped one of them; 4) She was driving a car full of little girls through Japantown, when a CMer who was deliberately attempting to block her path threw himself into her path and got tapped.


I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. I have seen irritated drivers attempt to blitz through the swarm of cyclists at CM, with zero regard to the welfare of anyone outside their car. Usually everyone gets out of the way, but I have seen a bike get crushed this way. Fortunately the cyclist was unharmed. On the other hand, I have never witnessed anyone involved in a CM attack a car for no reason, and I cannot fathom that ever happening because everyone knows that a single car could run over half of the mass.

I guess what I am trying to say is that while I don't know all of the details around the minivan incident, I refuse to belive that massers suddenly descended upon her van and started smashing the **** out of it. I am sure that she tried to force her way though the mass and got smashed on as a result.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. I have seen irritated drivers attempt to blitz through the swarm of cyclists at CM, with zero regard to the welfare of anyone outside their car. Usually everyone gets out of the way, but I have seen a bike get crushed this way. Fortunately the cyclist was unharmed. On the other hand, I have never witnessed anyone involved in a CM attack a car for no reason, and I cannot fathom that ever happening because everyone knows that a single car could run over half of the mass.

I guess what I am trying to say is that while I don't know all of the details around the minivan incident, I refuse to belive that massers suddenly descended upon her van and started smashing the **** out of it. I am sure that she tried to force her way though the mass and got smashed on as a result.I think what happened was she tried to drive when the light turned green. Some people in Critical Mass believe that a car has no right to mix with the mass. That's why I asked above if the point of Critical Mass isn't that bikes are a part of traffic too. In this case, we know that on a green light, she attempted to proceed. Then (according to her) she was swarmed. According to Critical Mass, she hit a CMer and tried to continue on. To me, it indicates that she tried to share the road with CM, and that ticked some CMers off enough to escalate. Whether she hit a CMer intentionally, or accidentally, or whether a CMer threw himself into her path to block her and and got hit is unclear. But from the past history of CM, painting the CMers as saints and her as a villain seems to me to be a half-truth.

Driving into a crowd of bicyclists in front of you because the light changed color is not "sharing the road", it is irresponsible, irrational and reckless driving. If it had been a crowd of children instead of bicyclists that she tried to run over, would anyone buy that argument? Although most drivers think otherwise, a green light does not mean to mindlessly step on the gas pedal, it means make sure the intersection is clear, then proceed.

Nobody besides those that were there at the time know what really happened, and none of those people seem to be telling the entire truth, so it really does us no good to speculate. However, based on my experience with drivers blocked by critical mass, I think that she tried to plow through the mass without regards to anyones safety. So I think she got what was coming and should quit complaining about it. If it is true that someone instigated some sort of confrontation, then yes, the participants of that CM were out of control, but I really doubt that is the case.

Driving into a crowd of bicyclists in front of you because the light changed color is not "sharing the road", it is irresponsible, irrational and reckless driving.Driving *into* them would be reckless. Proceeding on green *isn't* reckless, and she had a legal right to proceed on green. They, in contrast, had no legal or moral right to prevent her from proceeding on green. She, in turn, had a legal and moral obligation to avoid colliding with any of the other vehicles (read: bicycles) on the road. They had the same legal and moral obligation. Their presence on the road doesn't give them exclusive rights to the road, and to the extent that they tried to prevent her from proceeding, they were in the wrong.


If it had been a crowd of children instead of bicyclists that she tried to run over, would anyone buy that argument?That's the problem with half-truths and tortured reasoning. Somehow, you made the leap from "she proceeded on green" to "She tried to run [somebody] over." If she's going to be accused of an intentional act, and a crime, would it be too much to ask for evidence?



Although most drivers think otherwise, a green light does not mean to mindlessly step on the gas pedal, it means make sure the intersection is clear, then proceed.Let me fill in the missing half of that truth for you: The light changed from red to green, she attempted to proceed, and CMers-- who "protest" each month that "bikes are part of traffic too"-- deliberately attempted to prevent her from proceeding by swarming her vehicle. Apparently "part of traffic too" doesn't actually mean that CMers want to share the road.


Nobody besides those that were there at the time know what really happened, and none of those people seem to be telling the entire truth, so it really does us no good to speculate. However, based on my experience with drivers blocked by critical mass, I think that she tried to plow through the mass without regards to anyones safety. So I think she got what was coming and should quit complaining about it. If it is true that someone instigated some sort of confrontation, then yes, the participants of that CM were out of control, but I really doubt that is the case.And I doubt that the CMers didn't instigate the trouble. I suspect I'm not alone in that doubt.

So let me ask you: If she instigated the problem, and "got what was coming," would you also agree that if instead, the CMer who got hit was in fact the instigator, then he "got what was coming"?

Actually, from the local accounts, she wasn't "corked" at an intersection, but tried to go around a group of cyclists when the accident occured.
The one that didn't make the headlines, about the cyclists blocking the intersection on the green, and the limo driver arguing with them and trying to move a bike out of the road while someone was holding it, and the stealing of the keys out of the limo(personal property), along with the slashing of his tires with a deadly weapon, is quite different.

Actually, from the local accounts, she wasn't "corked" at an intersection, but tried to go around a group of cyclists when the accident occured.I didn't mean that she was corked-- just that she tried to proceed on green and the CMers *may* have tried to interfere with that. But we don't really know, without some objective (read: Not CM, and not the driver) eyewitness accounts. From past CM behavior, however, the proposition that they tried to interfere with her proceeding is entirely within character for CM.

Driving *into* them would be reckless. Proceeding on green *isn't* reckless, and she had a legal right to proceed on green.

I fail to see a difference here. If proceeding on green means driving into a crowd of cyclists, what is the difference? All the time I see cars proceed through the yellow or even the red, only to get stuck in the intersection and block traffic that has the green. Nobody would think about driving into a car just because they had a green light, because there car would get wrecked. On the other hand, if it is bicyclists blocking the intersection (ie critical mass) people seem to think it's okay to try to just drive through it. Why do I know this? Because I have seen it happen many times in the short amount of time I have been participating in CM.


They, in contrast, had no legal or moral right to prevent her from proceeding on green. She, in turn, had a legal and moral obligation to avoid colliding with any of the other vehicles (read: bicycles) on the road. They had the same legal and moral obligation. Their presence on the road doesn't give them exclusive rights to the road, and to the extent that they tried to prevent her from proceeding, they were in the wrong.

Maybe they were legally in the wrong, but it gets sketchy quick when the mass gets split in two. The cars get stuck behind the part of the mass that made it through the light, then the other half of the mass catches up and the drivers are surrounded by bicyclists. its like the running of the bulls. It would be safer for both parties if the drivers would stop being so goddamn impatient and wait a minute or two.


That's the problem with half-truths and tortured reasoning. Somehow, you made the leap from "she proceeded on green" to "She tried to run [somebody] over." If she's going to be accused of an intentional act, and a crime, would it be too much to ask for evidence?

You got me on that one I guess. I should have chosen my words more carefully.



Let me fill in the missing half of that truth for you: The light changed from red to green, she attempted to proceed, and CMers-- who "protest" each month that "bikes are part of traffic too"-- deliberately attempted to prevent her from proceeding by swarming her vehicle. Apparently "part of traffic too" doesn't actually mean that CMers want to share the road.

Is it really too much to ask for people to wait for up to a minute or two to make sure that everyone safely gets on their way? If I come across someone who I can tell is going to run a light or stopsign when I have the right of way, I let them go because I don't want anyone to get hurt. as for the corking of intersections, it is a dangerous situation to have cars stuck behind half of a critical mass with the other half behind them. The drivers get impatient and people get hurt. Also, not not everyone who rides in CM is trying to make a statement about bicycle advocacy, some are just there to ride and have fun. (oh no, not FUN!)


And I doubt that the CMers didn't instigate the trouble. I suspect I'm not alone in that doubt.

Thats fine that you think that. I happen to disagree. Maybe you're right, I don't know. But just because you and a bunch of other people have a low opinion of massers doesn't mean that they are automatically guilty.


So let me ask you: If she instigated the problem, and "got what was coming," would you also agree that if instead, the CMer who got hit was in fact the instigator, then he "got what was coming"?

yes, I would.


Basically this all comes down to hearsay. Farrando could be the villian, or the massers could be. We really have no way of telling what happened. All of the assumptions that you and I and everyone else are making are based on our opinions and experiences with CM. What are you experiences with CM, Blue Order? Have you ever ridden in one? Ever had someone try and drive through you and 20 other cyclists because they didn't want to wait literally 10 or 15 seconds? I cannot fault you for your opinions, but I can't entirely agree with them either.

THE EARTH IS'NT FLAT????? :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

All cyclists know that it is mostly uphill! :rolleyes:

Hey, I left a reply over on that message board, under my other screen name.

I started off by mentioning that critical mass is a "protest ride", to protest the deaths of 900 cyclists every year.

Quote from not fred:
"Where do A&S people find all these forums? I doubt you saw a link to that thread on your local news channel, is that a forum you actually visit regularly?
I keep seeing these threads in A&S linking to sites full of ignorant, bigoted, hateful people, and it makes me question the type of people that post in A&S. Are they the same people that visit these sites?"

'notfred', these are some great questions.

as for this 'Blue Order': "My visceral reaction to the current Supreme Court is one of disgust at the half-truths, distortions of meaning, and tortured logic employed to reach the results they want."

prove it.

as for this 'Blue Order': "My visceral reaction to the current Supreme Court is one of disgust at the half-truths, distortions of meaning, and tortured logic employed to reach the results they want."

prove it.You want me to prove what my visceral reaction is? :roflmao:

this part: "the half-truths, distortions of meaning, and tortured logic employed to reach the results they want"

this part: "the half-truths, distortions of meaning, and tortured logic employed to reach the results they want"So you want me to provide an analysis of Supreme Court jurisprudence? To what end?

you made a pretty outlandish claim about the Supreme Court, i want you to back it up.

can you not? will you shoot back another half-witted comment with a smiley face instead of an answer? can i assume that none of your arguments can be backed up?