Advocacy & Safety - When Bikes Rule The Road, Motorists Fume

Yes, but that keeps population scared, so government can do some interesting stuff.

I propose the Government do some interesting things to Critical Mass(holes). Things like using the Army and a high pressure water cannon.

I propose the Government do some interesting things to Critical Mass(holes). Things like using the Army and a high pressure water cannon.As much as I believe that CM is a setback for advocacy of cyclists rights, I think this response is drastically out of proportion to the annoyance CM represents, and would make martyrs out of them. Far better to make a measured response:

1) Require all CMs that are not escorted by police to get a parade permit;

2) Require all CMs that are not escorted by police or that do not have a parade permit to observe all traffic laws;

3) Ticket any CMers observed violating the traffic laws;

4) Ticket any motorists observed violating the traffic laws;

5) Arrest any CMers inciting a disturbance of the peace (i.e., harassing motorists, yelling at motorists, pounding on cars, etc.);

6) Arrest any motorists harming or attempting to harm CMers.

This response would be not be out of proportion to the violations committed, and would not be indiscriminate, as would using water cannons, the army-- illegal in the U.S.--= and other over-reactions.

CMers who are riding in observance of the laws would continue to exercise their right to ride, and CMers who violate the laws would receive an appropriate response. If CMers wish to characterize their ride as Civil Disobedience, they would do so with the expectation that the laws would be enforced, and they would willingly accept the enforcement of the laws in furtherance of their Civil Disobedience.

I agree. But a fundamental part of Gandhian civil disobedience has always been the willingness to be arrested in order to spotlight the injustice of the law being upheld.

In the case of Critical Mass, where's the injustice? That bikes are required to obey the traffic laws? Or is it something more fundamental than that-- for example, what may often be a de facto second-class status for cyclists?

Let's say it's the latter. I fail to see how running red lights reinforces the notion that cyclists should not be relegated to second-class status. If anything, it only reinforces the notion that bikes are not "real" vehicles, and therefore shouldn't be on the road with "real" vehicles.

I also fail to see how deliberately antagonizing people who are only trying to get home from work creates any sort of societal-wide movement in support of cyclists' rights. If anything, I would argue that it only increases sentiment to get cyclists off the road-- if not through the law, then through physical force when the law isn't looking.

I competely agree. Civil disobediance is generally a PR campaign - you win by making your oppressors look like wrongheaded areseholes. CM utterly fails in that regard by making *themselves* look like wrongheaded arseholes.

They make the mistake of assuming that the best way to get respect is to demand respect, and to threaten. They couldn't be more wrong.

Not to get into the legalities of the CM, but I think generally the reason they block up the intersections is too keep the whole group together. THis keep the "mass" an actual mass, as intended, and actually facilitates getting out of everyone's (read drivers) way quickly. In other cities sometimes the group of riders is actually quite small and they do stop for traffic lights. If the mass is all on one block the lights ARE observed. Keeping the group together is paramount, imagine the traffic chaos if the mass got split over several sets of lights....the inconvience of watching the mass roll through your green light to stay with the head of the group is minor to having several smaller masses spread out over the downtown core.

The police have quietly and unobtrusively escorted us around the core during CM rides. We cut through the Eaton Centre once, much to the amusment of the shoppers. (smaller CM that time)

As for violent CM'rs.. I think that it's simply percentile fringe elements, as the vast majority of riders have no intention of going out and beating on cars. BUT if some motorist is going to drive into the riders, I can't say I'd be very surprised to hear of damage to the car. If a motorist drove into any protest/parade/crowd..legal or otherwise simply because they were inconvienienced I'd venture to say there would be serious repercussions there as well. That said I don't think the violent fringe of any protester have any place in a mass protest... an example would be the anti-globalization (g8) protests. "the man" has also been known to plant members into said protests into order to make the majority of protesters look like a bunch of holigans.

On Friday there was a memorial ride for our friend Charlie here in Toronto, CM style, Charlie liked the CM rides. 100+ riders and it went very well.

Here's some pics. http://www.flickr.com/photos/martinreis/sets/72157601523563994/

To try an draw a parallel between CM rides and terrorism, means you have no idea what terrorism really is.

I like the line

Started here in 1992 by a handful of idealists, the free-form events have spread to every continent but Antarctica and to 300 cities worldwide, including Los Angeles.

Wow, from SF all the way to LA. I'm sure they could have picked a more remote city. Although I suppose it's like th country songs says. "All around the earth from Dallas to Fort Worth!"

I've seen the CM rides here and the police will escort them and block intersections so they can all stay together as a group. The rides here are small, only like 300-400 riders.

Keeping the group together is paramount, imagine the traffic chaos if the mass got split over several sets of lights....

Isn't traffic "chaos" (caused by cyclists) the point? Why not split the mass up and ride completely lawfully? You'd slow traffic down a heck of a lot more than riding around in a big bunch and the police wouldn't be able to do a thing about it. If the point is to ride around in a big group, then why not get a parade permit, or go do it out on some empty road?

[Note: I put "chaos" in quotes simply because a lot of people assume that more bikes on the road would turn the roads into chaos. I think that assessment is far from the truth but adding a few hundred cyclists operating to the letter of the law (foot down stops, no more than two abreast) into the mess of downtown rush hour will add to the chaos for sure.]

As much as I believe that CM is a setback for advocacy of cyclists rights, I think this response is drastically out of proportion to the annoyance CM represents, and would make martyrs out of them. Far better to make a measured response:

1) Require all CMs that are not escorted by police to get a parade permit;

2) Require all CMs that are not escorted by police or that do not have a parade permit to observe all traffic laws;

3) Ticket any CMers observed violating the traffic laws;

4) Ticket any motorists observed violating the traffic laws;

5) Arrest any CMers inciting a disturbance of the peace (i.e., harassing motorists, yelling at motorists, pounding on cars, etc.);

6) Arrest any motorists harming or attempting to harm CMers.

This response would be not be out of proportion to the violations committed, and would not be indiscriminate, as would using water cannons, the army-- illegal in the U.S.--= and other over-reactions.

CMers who are riding in observance of the laws would continue to exercise their right to ride, and CMers who violate the laws would receive an appropriate response. If CMers wish to characterize their ride as Civil Disobedience, they would do so with the expectation that the laws would be enforced, and they would willingly accept the enforcement of the laws in furtherance of their Civil Disobedience.

The ironic thing is, strict adherence to the traffic laws might actually make much more of a point.

I competely agree. Civil disobediance is generally a PR campaign - you win by making your oppressors look like wrongheaded areseholes. CM utterly fails in that regard by making *themselves* look like wrongheaded arseholes.

They make the mistake of assuming that the best way to get respect is to demand respect, and to threaten. They couldn't be more wrong.

Funny how that's exactly the sentiment of most Southeners during the Civil Rights movements, blacks are just such... and such, let's just murder them.

It's NOT civil disobedience if you're not breaking any laws. It's NOT civil disobedience if you're BUYING a parade permit

Non-violent civil disobedience " a la Ghandi " only works in a population that will "feel" for you. Ghandi was not demonstrating against "people" he was demonstrating against the government, and most of the "people" were for him.

That's why the Civil Rights Movement needed the Black Panthers, because without self defense brought back into play, ALL civil rights leaders would have been murdered.

CM rides are just as much against the "motoring people" as they are against the government. Protests against people are harder to win, because democracies favor majorities and the majority in this society is motorists.

It's not civil disobedience if you're not breaking any laws. It's not civil disobedience if you're BUYING a parade permit, and motorists threaten your life whether you're breaking the law or not, endangerment of life is not just punishment for traffic light violation and the protester who's life is being risked should defend themselves.

So yes when the police says hey there you drove through that red light, the ticket is fair game, but that SUV trying to crush the cyclist was not fair game and deserved any dings it received.

I don't think the point is chaos....chaos would be relatively easy. (then we do enter the realm of domestic terror...all bad all the time) I think several hundred riders trying to adhere to the right hand side of the roadway during rush hour would result in several dead or injured cyclists in several cities on the first try, and within the idea of CM (I think), render it completely impotent as a movement. The "mass" should stay together IMHO for the safety of everyone involved. CMr's generally aren't concerned about the motorists, as said motorists aren't generally concerned about cyclists either....until they reach a Critical Mass, then they are impossible to ignore. That said I will not defend or condone violence perpetuated by the unsavory elements within some of the larger rides. However, try to push through in your car/run someone over and expect to be pushed back at.


This all said I must say I am sooo glad this has managed to stay a well behaved debated thread. A&S spooks so many users away because of the threads tendancy to breakdown into usless posts. Thank-you all.

...That said I don't think the violent fringe of any protester have any place in a mass protest... an example would be the anti-globalization (g8) protests. "the man" has also been known to plant members into said protests into order to make the majority of protesters look like a bunch of holigans.

Yes I like the use of "the man" very nicely put. I also wonder if most Americans on this forum realize that Canadians officially lost the right to "free assembly" a few years ago and that the mere fact of "assembling" in public without a permit is now officially a crime in Canada. Big Brother is here :eek:

I think several hundred riders trying to adhere to the right hand side of the roadway during rush hour would result in several dead or injured cyclists in several cities on the first try, and within the idea of CM (I think), render it completely impotent as a movement. The "mass" should stay together IMHO for the safety of everyone involved.

Well, misinterpretation of the traffic laws might make cyclists think that should stay to the right edge of the roadway to obey the law, but if they understood the laws, they'd realize that the law places no such restriction on them in many instances. A city environment is such that a cyclist could make the case almost anywhere that they should not be to the far right (parked cars, intersections, debris, narrow lane, going the speed of traffic, etc.)

Do take note of the "speed of traffic" part too. With a large group of cyclists, the speed of "traffic" at that time is the speed of the cyclists, not of the few motor vehicles that can fit on the same block as 50 pairs of cyclists riding legally abreast of each other.

If safety is really the focus of the Critical Mass riders staying in a pack, I don't see how running red lights fits in either. Couldn't the pack that made it through pull over and stop to wait for the others?

Well, misinterpretation of the traffic laws might make cyclists think that should stay to the right edge of the roadway to obey the law, but if they understood the laws, they'd realize that the law places no such restriction on them in many instances. A city environment is such that a cyclist could make the case almost anywhere that they should not be to the far right (parked cars, intersections, debris, narrow lane, going the speed of traffic, etc.)

Do take note of the "speed of traffic" part too. With a large group of cyclists, the speed of "traffic" at that time is the speed of the cyclists, not of the few motor vehicles that can fit on the same block as 50 pairs of cyclists riding legally abreast of each other.

If safety is really the focus of the Critical Mass riders staying in a pack, I don't see how running red lights fits in either. Couldn't the pack that made it through pull over and stop to wait for the others?

I tend to agree... the pack could at least slow down to allow the tail to catch up... And the strict adherence to the laws such as stopping for red lights and individually stopping for stop signs can make a bigger point about the criticality of the mass.

Turning CM into a big wandering aimless party does nothing for cycling.

Funny how that's exactly the sentiment of most Southeners during the Civil Rights movements, blacks are just such... and such, let's just murder them.

It's NOT civil disobedience if you're not breaking any laws. It's NOT civil disobedience if you're BUYING a parade permit

Non-violent civil disobedience " a la Ghandi " only works in a population that will "feel" for you. Ghandi was not demonstrating against "people" he was demonstrating against the government, and most of the "people" were for him.

That's why the Civil Rights Movement needed the Black Panthers, because without self defense brought back into play, ALL civil rights leaders would have been murdered.

CM rides are just as much against the "motoring people" as they are against the government. Protests against people are harder to win, because democracies favor majorities and the majority in this society is motorists.

It's not civil disobedience if you're not breaking any laws. It's not civil disobedience if you're BUYING a parade permit, and motorists threaten your life whether you're breaking the law or not, endangerment of life is not just punishment for traffic light violation and the protester who's life is being risked should defend themselves.

So yes when the police says hey there you drove through that red light, the ticket is fair game, but that SUV trying to crush the cyclist was not fair game and deserved any dings it received.You have no understanding of civil disobedience, as you have amply demonstrated in every post. Try reading Gene Sharp, and then get back to us.

You have no understanding of civil disobedience, as you have amply demonstrated in every post. Try reading Gene Sharp, and then get back to us.

On differential between non-violence to people and non-violence to property:

The Berrigans (Daniel a Jesuit priest, and Philip a Josephite priest, later excommunicated) became well known during the turbulent 1960's for their bold confrontation with the government over its Vietnam policies. At the Baltimore Customs House, they poured human blood on draft files and at the Catonsville, Maryland draft board they took and then burned draft records in the parking lot with homemade napalm.
...
“…ways we inherited from Gandhi and King and above all, from Jesus. In ways also that we had to invent.”
...
Our critics say that attacking atomic weapons with ball peen hammers is an act of violence. Destroying property, they insist, is a form of violence. At best, it is a curious argument, one I've heard many times before. Warheads whose sole purpose is to vaporize cities are hardly to be thought legitimate property. Bombs that indiscriminately murder millions of men, women and children are not ‘property’.
...
…I came back from Latin America much more tentative about the possibility of forging the needed changes apart from violence. This was true in countries where all the forces of Church and society seemed to be united against change.28 This statement was significant for its hedge against an absolute non-violence.29 The note of violence here, paradoxically cradled within the philosophy of pacifism, became more pronounced in Daniel's writing late in the 1960's and early 1970's.30 It would also generate an opening to consider that in the struggle with “illegitimate” authority, damage done to property can be properly said to exist within the spirit of non-violence.
...
A critical church letter to them... concluded by saying that “When the history of this time is written, incidents such as these will stand out as flames lighting a darkness”and decrying “subservient acceptance of every common decree”and “obedient, docile men.”
...
getting arrested has been romanticized.55 The late Jesuit pacifist Richard McSorley wondered if Philip Berrigan could have done far more on the streets and in the schools, churches, and synagogues than penned up in government cages.56 He wondered if the Berrigans could have accomplished more through teaching, writing, lecturing, picketing and organizing than they did by becoming professional prisoners."

The ironic thing is, strict adherence to the traffic laws might actually make much more of a point.
+1, except I'd change the "might" to "would." Also imagine how it would confound the anti-CM cops.

You miss one key part of the definition (http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/civil.htm)--willingly accepting the penalty:



To learn more, Google, <<"civil disobedience" "three principles">>.
Daily Commute, I'm with you on obeying traffic laws on principle.

But flipping the script, how many motorists disobey traffic laws routinely, not "on principle," but out of selfish motives?

Yet, recently I was involved in a "march." We had permits, and did everything legally. It was important to further our agenda to do this.

This talk of civil disobedience is funny. In my experience most cyclists are solidly middle class or middle class countercultural types; to compare their being irked over inconveniences regarding their hobby to the Civil Rights Movement or Indian independance just shows how selfish and self-centered the bourgeois is though I suppose that's really nothing new. Add a layer of self righteousness to this selfishness and we get a doubley disgusting mix.

So Hector who's been busting his ass all day in some hot factory gets home late because some pampered yuppie wants his "rights".

This talk of civil disobedience is funny. In my experience most cyclists are solidly middle class or middle class countercultural types; to compare their being irked over inconveniences regarding their hobby to the Civil Rights Movement or Indian independance just shows how selfish and self-centered the bourgeois is though I suppose that's really nothing new. Add a layer of self righteousness to this selfishness and we get a doubley disgusting mix.

So Hector who's been busting his ass all day in some hot factory gets home late because some pampered yuppie wants his "rights".

Bravo, bravo, in fact, that poor immigrant worker might be cycling to work today and might be banned from the streets tomorrow or have to stop at every intersection because his right of way is lost or be limited by a 30km/h speed limit, or have to take an even slower transit bus, because the bourgeois cyclists thought they were more important than essential cyclists. I invite you to SE Florida, you'll see that the vast majority of people using cycles to commute are either black or latino or real old or real young. Yuppy commuters are a minority.

If cyclists were simply allowed to share the roads at all times without being harassed by SUVs, taxis and delivery trucks, Critical Mass rides wouldn't even need exist. What a beautiful world, cyclists and automobiles, sharing the pavement in a perfect ebb and flow of harmony, flowers flowers flowers :D

... to compare their (bourgeois) being irked over inconveniences regarding their hobby.

I've tried to make the bourgeoisie point before but it's not very popular here, I was trying to not use the word hobby, because for a certain number of cyclists it's not a hobby but an essential mode of transportation, but the bourgeois on the site felt hurt by not being made to feel like essential cyclists.

Essential cyclists like Hector and myself don't need special laws and costly extra infrastructure, what we need is for all that money to go to the education of the kids of all people, no matter creed or finances.

Thank you for saying it :)

I wonder what would happen if Critical Mass pulled their stunts around the Hunter's Point area, near Third and Army streets.

Daily Commute, I'm with you on obeying traffic laws on principle.

But flipping the script, how many motorists disobey traffic laws routinely, not "on principle," but out of selfish motives?

Yet, recently I was involved in a "march." We had permits, and did everything legally. It was important to further our agenda to do this.
Sure, many motorists are jerks, but the message of cyclist rally's should be that we're better than they are. CM sometimes sinks to the level of the worst motorists.

What really ticked me off was the CM'ers who compared themselves to civil rights marchers. Like everyone here, I've violated a traffic law while cycling (and driving). But unlike some CM'ers, I don't think that makes me Rosa Parks or MLK.

This talk of civil disobedience is funny. In my experience most cyclists are solidly middle class or middle class countercultural types; to compare their being irked over inconveniences regarding their hobby to the Civil Rights Movement or Indian independance just shows how selfish and self-centered the bourgeois is though I suppose that's really nothing new. Add a layer of self righteousness to this selfishness and we get a doubley disgusting mix.

So Hector who's been busting his ass all day in some hot factory gets home late because some pampered yuppie wants his "rights".
That is funny.

Today, I didn't hold up any "Hectors," but rather, the "bourgeois" yuppies idling on the pavement (due to the sheer numbers of them) held up each other, while I slipped, unobstructed, away.

That is funny.

Today, I didn't hold up any "Hectors," but rather, the "bourgeois" yuppies idling on the pavement (due to the sheer numbers of them) held up each other, while I slipped, unobstructed, away.


Good for you. But that has nothing to do with this CM nonsense.

In my experience most cyclists are solidly middle class or middle class countercultural types...

Good for you. But that has nothing to do with this CM nonsense.
Neither does your post.

As I remember, you were talking about "most cyclists in your experience," not CM.

In your experience, what "kinds of cyclists" ride in CM rides? Have you spoken to them enough to know their bourgeois affiliations?

Or do you just know perhaps one "yuppie" CM participant you dislike, or maybe just those on internet forums with a computer?

I carry a revolver when driving and when biking. More and more people go around armed. Makes for civility.
Sounds more to me like you're living in fear.

Picked from another "boilermaker post."

If you're armed, you are ready to use it, or you shouldn't be carrying.

Have you ever actually killed anyone?

Sounds more to me like you're living in fear.

Have you ever actually killed anyone?

Sometimes.

No.

Neither does your post.

As I remember, you were talking about "most cyclists in your experience," not CM.

In your experience, what "kinds of cyclists" ride in CM rides? Have you spoken to them enough to know their bourgeois affiliations?

Or do you just know perhaps one "yuppie" CM participant you dislike, or maybe just those on internet forums with a computer?


Adult bicycle use is very common in trendy areas of Chicago and much less so in working class neighborhoods. Working people are more likely to use bikes as recreation than transportation. 35 years in the trades I met many recreational bike riders but only two, count'em TWO, who ever rode a bike to work.

Adult bicycle use is very common in trendy areas of Chicago and much less so in working class neighborhoods. Working people are more likely to use bikes as recreation than transportation. 35 years in the trades I met many recreational bike riders but only two, count'em TWO, who ever rode a bike to work.
You have reiterated your original contention.

How many CM riders are you friends with?

No.
Are you ready to kill someone with that piece? If not, it could get you killed.

It takes a lot more than words and emotions to kill someone. If you're not ready to do that, you should sell your gun.

In fact, if you are even a little less sure than the "someone" who might be ready to shoot you, you're dead already.

I can't imagine the skill it would take to kill an armed person who is on foot, or in a car, with a pistol from a bicycle.

Think about it for a minute: you're on a bike. Who wants to shoot you? You're nobody, you're on a bike, what have you got that anyone could desire?

Think about it for a minute: you're on a bike. Who wants to shoot you? You're nobody, you're on a bike, what have you got that anyone could desire?
37-year-old bicyclist shot in Pasadena
Daily News Wire Services
Article Last Updated: 08/23/2007 01:12:25 PM PDT
http://www.dailynews.com/ci_6697287?source=most_viewed

PASADENA - Police were searching this morning for someone who was in a late model Chevrolet Impala who shot a 37-year-old bicyclist who was in stable condition today.

The shooting occurred around 11:10 last night on North El Molino Avenue near East Claremont Street, police said.

The victim was with two friends -- both men in their 20s -- as he was riding northbound on El Molino Avenue, police said.

Just before Claremont Street, a silver Impala pulled up next to them, words were exchanged between the people in the car and the three men on the street, an occupant of the Impala pulled out a gun and fired a single shot, striking the 37-year-old in the stomach, police said.

The vehicle sped away, police said.

The victim was taken to a hospital in stable condition and was expected to survive. No one else was hurt.

The shooting is not believed to be gang-related, Taylor said

^^
Yikes!

As for motorists getting pi55ed off when cyclists rule the road, it ain't just Critical Mass...

The "city" I live in hosts the Ironman Canada (http://ironman.com/canada) this weekend, and the tri-athletes have been showing up for the last 2 weeks or so, doing lotsa training rides.

And boy can I ever notice a growing frustration in the cager attitude!

the commuters do it on weekdays and the weekend warrior club riders do it on the weekends. geez, when do the motorists get a break?

:rolleyes:


:roflmao:


seriously.....motorist education needed!!!

^^word ..that's totally where the message needs to go. Motorists need to know the road simply isn't just theirs. Law enforcement doesn't seem willing to do it... maybe we should have a big ride about it and ... :lol:

BTW in regards to an earlier post of mine "the man admitted to planting, yet again, officers in the most recent summit in Quebec.... "not as provacateurs" they said. Black bandanas, and carrying rocks..naw not upto anything at all just gathering intel...******s.

I've ridden virtually everyday to work for the past 5 years, yea must be a hobby. *snicker*

Law enforcement identifies with and defends motorist ignorance and superiority, largely because they primarily spend their time driving around in cars all day.

'the man' is also known to have planted agents provacateurs repeatedly on the NYC Critical Mass ride, I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in other cities too.

--cue black helicopters circling overhead--

I've condemned CM a lot in these forums, but I wouldn't put it past the NYPD to do something like that. CM and the NYPD deserve each other.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/26/1329201
http://ottawa.indymedia.org/

Sorry but I couldn't find the Village Voice article I was looking for, It's linked up somewhere in an older thread...

'the man' is also known to have planted agents provacateurs repeatedly on the NYC Critical Mass ride, I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in other cities too.

WTF? Planted agents? Like Trilateral Commission/Stonecutters Union type stuff?
Dooood! Where do I sign up? I always wanted to be a planted agent and go to super secret meetings!

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao: