Advocacy & Safety - bicycle confiscation in portland

the police picked the lock and confiscated several bicycles of the group called zoobomb in portland, oregon. (www.zoobomb.org (http://www.zoobomb.org)) their reasoning was that the bikes, really like a bike sculpture, were blocking pedestrian traffic, but photos show this is totally false. the zoobombers unlock the bikes every friday and take lightrail up to the zoo, then "bomb" the west hills, peacefully i might add.

i suspect this was a response to the spontaneous critical mass in washington county the same night, friday the 5th of sept.

please, if anyone has a few extra minutes, even if you are not a member of the portland community, write a quick email or letter or make a quick phone call opposing the arbitrary seisure of these bikes. the police say they will only return them if "proof of ownership" is shown, which is really almost impossible unless they kept the lock and someone comes forward with a key. this is totally outrageous behavior, and the more people who speak up, the better. thanks in advance.

more info can be found at:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/09/271312.shtml


portland police independent review
503.823.0146
policeiandr@police.ci.portland.or.us

mayor vera katz
503.823.4000
mayorkatz@ci.portland.or.us

Were the bikes parked on public property? private property? public right-of-way? Are they left there all week for use one day per week? More details, please.

the bikes are parked in a sort of pile on the sidewalk and locked to a public rack. typically on a rack like this one there are two bikes at a time, a "staple" rack, but zoobomb locks about 15 or so in a pile sort of formation. they are left there all week. the bikes do not block the sidewalk. pedestrians and wheelchairs can get through without a problem, without even changing their path i might add. there is no conflict either with street traffic.

anything else? sorry if i was vague in the original post. for some fuzzy photos, check out the link to portland indymedia and that might give you a better idea.

scott

Originally posted by gobybicycle.com
the bikes are parked in a sort of pile on the sidewalk and locked to a public rack. typically on a rack like this one there are two bikes at a time, a "staple" rack, but zoobomb locks about 15 or so in a pile sort of formation. they are left there all week.

The last sentence is a dead giveaway. On the rare occasion that I actaually have need to use a public bike rack (I do most of my shopping by walking, since I live near a major shopping centre), it annoys the crap out of me when I can't use a rack because it's full of bikes that have been there for ages that people simply can't be bothered taking home. It's just plain courtesy here. Use the public rack when you need to, then take your bike away when you go so that others may use it. Otherwise, the local council will be forced to start charging people to leave their bikes there.

because you're not familiar with that block, i'll let you know that due to the requests of the local businesses, many of whom are frequented by bicyclists, there are about a half dozen or more racks on that block alone. there is always a rack on that block to use.

even if the racks were overcrowded, this is not the reason the police gave. had this been the case, they could have provided the zoobombers with a warning, and given them some time to remove them. no warning whatsoever. this is more than likely retaliation for the police's hurt pride because tickets given to the zoobombers recently were thrown out. they were given tickets for riding the max (the local lightrail in portland) to get to the zoo to bomb the hills (bicycles are allowed on the max: as far as i know, there are no rules to the number of bikes allowed). i'm not sure the exact charge, but (i'm guessing here) the police were looking to break up bicycle culture, which they've been doing quite a bit of late, and they descended on the zoobombers for being a loosely organized group that were out having fun.

anyway, if the reason were that the racks were being hogged by the zoobombers, i'm sure that the zoobombers would have been reasonable about it. but the manner in which it was done was clear evidence that this was retaliation from hurt pride, or something of the sort. this was not "serve and protect."

scott larkin

To help clear up a little confusion regarding this issue...

Zoobombers ride very little bikes, and have built a very unique, creative local culture around this form of bicycle entertainment.... http://www.zoobomb.org/images//zborg_04.gif

They meet at a place called Rocco's Pizza, where they keep enough bikes outside for anyone who wants to experience a bomb. It has developed into a sort of artistic cultural statement, and have only been accepted by the local population. The little bikes are chained up to the rack, and are very colorful and have become a downtown Portland landmark and artistic sculpture. There are many more racks in the same block, and no-one has ever had a problem with these bikes being there other than the police, who only have a problem with them because they associate the zoobombers with CM, which they aren't as a group. They have even been labeled a "terrorist group", because someone saw them with signs that said "Bomb the zoo, not Iraq". By bombing the zoo, they mean riding down the hill from the zoo on little pink and green bikes, wearing costumes, and having fun.

I can see how it would be easy to misunderstand what is going on here if you're not familiar with the zoobombers, but the simple fact is that the police stepped way over their bounds when dismantling a public art sculpture, and stealing the property of innocent people. On top of all this, they threatened to use their fazers on people who were just walking over to see what is going on. There is some extreme oppression going on right here in Portland, and it needs to be addressed pronto. This coming after the Portland police have been under intense scrutiny for their racist agendas and policies. The mayor just did urge the chief to resign, which is a step in the right direction. We need to get as much attention as we can to this problem, so please help out by writing, calling, or e-mailing the mayor or the police independent review if you can. Thanks.

http://www.zoobomb.org/

http://www.zoobomb.org/image/view_photo.php?set_albumName=MiniBikeSummer&id=RatPack

Originally posted by gonesh9
To help clear up a little confusion regarding this issue...

Zoobombers ride very little bikes, and have built a very unique, creative local culture around this form of bicycle entertainment.... http://www.zoobomb.org/images//zborg_04.gif

They meet at a place called Rocco's Pizza, where they keep enough bikes outside for anyone who wants to experience a bomb.

...

They have even been labeled a "terrorist group", because someone saw them with signs that said "Bomb the zoo, not Iraq". By bombing the zoo, they mean riding down the hill from the zoo on little pink and green bikes, wearing costumes, and having fun.

...


I feel sort of bad for the FBI agent that gets assigned to infiltrate this "terror cell" in Portland, but his reports should make for hilarious reading.

Sounds like just an uptight Police Chief. I think I would "bomb" his lawn a few times a month and then call it even.

Dan

Sounds like an annoying bunch of idiots to me.

Originally posted by DieselDan
Sounds like an annoying bunch of idiots to me.

Yes, the police force here needs some major change! :)

sounds to me like dieseldan has the perfect mindset to live in a totalitarian society.

Unless I'm missing something it is pretty rude to leave a pile of bikes locked to a rack all week.....now that some consider it public art and you are presenting it as such, that makes this more of a first amendment issue, and not really about bikes. Which IMO makes this off topic and belongs in the political discussion section.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT ADVOCACY AND SAFETY, IS IT?

Next time you want me to write a public official don't try to deceive me, try being honest.

ehenz

Whoa, dude. You really do have some major issues.

i said that the bikes, which were legally parked to a public rack, were confiscated after the police broke the lock. this to me is not first amendment, this is illegal seizure of property. the fact that some portlanders saw it as a public art display is secondary.

it is your decision whether or not to write to the public officials named, and if you feel you do not have enough facts, then refrain from writing. but there was never any deception going on.

this is about advocacy in that the portland police are quite openly cracking down on bicycle culture in the area. so as an advocate, i'm opposing actions which may supress or otherwise quash bicycling. advocates must always press their issues with the establishment, of which the police are a part, in order to be an advocate.

also, as i said before, there are several racks on that block alone, and there is never a shortage of parking in the area. if they were hogging up racks, i'm sure the tight knit portland bicycling community would tell them to find another place to park them. i cannot speak for all the people of portland, however the ones i've spoken to see it as a spontaneous bit of portland character, and those who said this are not even necessarily bicyclists.

After looking further into "zoobomb" (goggle search) I may have been pre-mature with my above statement. But I still think I will hold back an e-mail and reserve this for the locals to resolve.

All I could picture was an unsightly heaping pile of kids bikes fit for garage sales, in a public area (which of course is not art, to most people I would assume) effecting businesses/home owners and pedestrians. One would think that there would have been at least a notice to remove them before the police took them.

I'll leave the above post as is for other's reading pleasures.

I do have issues (smile), I've been in the political discussion area too long and all my post are confrontational by habit. I'll try to change that.

ehenz

:thumbup: :beer:

I know what you mean, the political forums can be rough!

:)

The "public art" claim is a red herring. I doubt that a Portland resident has the right to erect their own sculpture anywhere on a public sidewalk they wish and not expect it to be removed.

As far as "confiscation of property" goes, a large mass of bike could reasonably be considered a blockage to pedestrians and even a safety hazard. I would expect that some of the nearby residents or shop owners considered the pile an eyesore as well. Perhaps some local filed a complaint.

Perhaps thing would work out better for all around if the zoobombers were to either find alternate storage arrangements for their bikes or spread them out so as not to create an unsightly mess. Perhaps the bikes could be stored at one or more person's house? Or maybe even a nearby self storage unit could be rented with collections from the group?

But that's so practical and boring; besides, the bikes were not an obstruction, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and creating an unsighly mess (which, by the way I diagree with) is not per se illegal. There's lots of ugly cars in parking spaces lining the streets of Portland, and in other cities and towns all over the world, and the police aren't going out of their way to tow them all away. This was a focused police action targeting a specific group that was causing no harm, for no reason other than to harass and discriminate.

as i said, the public art arguement is secondary, and that is not the purpose of them parking the bikes there. it is a perceived biproduct by a few individuals. no one claims that the bikes should remain there in support of public art projects.

as i also said, the bikes do no block traffic. two wheelchairs could get past without a problem. as far as safety, if those bikes are creating a safety hazard by being there, then a fire hydrant also is a safety hazard.

since they meet at rocco's pizza right across the street, this is the most convenient location. it is possible that someone filed a complaint, but then why didn't the police give a warning that the bikes needed to be moved as they would for an abandoned car? they knew that the group met once a week, and they knew at what time they met because they were often on hand to harass them. it is an obvious crackdown on a specific group of people. i suppose in the eyes of the police, they should be home watching tv like good responsible citizens and not out having a good time.

what surprises me the most is that people go to a website called bikeforums, and then they go to the advocacy section, and there is no sense of solidarity among those posting. i think we are all in agreement that we support bicycling and peaceful and creative bicycle culture, so why are there so many who are willing, in fact eager, to kowtow to the police?

scott larkin

hey scott, randya, gonesh9,

thanks for all the info. i must say i am not familir with this group, but i am somewhat familiar with the poor history of the Portland Police: handling of political protests such as anti-war rallies, anti-Bush rallies, CM, etc.

and the Police force in Portland certainly does not match the average Portlander (or the typical government official who usually support cycling as well as personal rights) and this should change! hopefully it will!

Note: i believe in the Police and believe most officiers are really working "to protect and to serve" but sometimes they go overboard and the power corrupts or whatever - this needs to be brought back in line so they are "protecting and serving" and not "harrasing, opressing and annoying" the public - also a good protection against totalitarianism/corruption by preventing unnecessary police power.

If the bikes were stacked in front of someone business, is there a chance that said business complained and that's why they were removed or are you going to say it's a conspiracy against bikers by the man? ;)

What is kind of sad here is that the police by confiscating the bikes may have intended to respond to a public claim for order, without much further thinking, but may risk to put an end to a fun and healthy, as to the mind and the body, activity probably mostly shared by young people. What happened to their claim for engagement in the community as the best crime preventer ? Maybe they'd rather have these kids doing drugs after all. ?Anyway, how about a suitable solution whereby the town or someone could provide a suitable site for parking (piling)the bikes and the police restitute all the confiscated bikes (all cleaned-up, greased and tuned-up of course
:D ) :beer:

Seems to be that you left the bikes there for a week. While they didn't block a path, and were not a real problem per se, I see two issues:

In so much as Critical Mass want's the same rights for bikes as cars, it would seem that if you park a car in the same public spot for over 48 hours, it can be towed. Well, that's a bitter pill.

Also, I'm sure there's an ordance for abandoned property. While you have the intent, I'm sure that it's impossible to know about it from a city perspective. Have you talked with local buisness owners to get thier perspective?

Now, for my 2 cents.


Beyond that, what gives you the right to leave a bike there, for a prolonged period of time? Is it OK to assume you have the right to take up space just because in your opinion that it's not used to it's fullest potential? Do you not have space in your living area to put a bike? And if you're oh so pro cycling, why would you leave the bikes there for a week at a time, and why would you not be riding said bikes?

Good arguments all around!:beer:

One thing I would like to point out that is in the center of this all, and which Ehenz already mentioned, is:


One would think that there would have been at least a notice to remove them before the police took them.

The simple truth is that the police have a problem with this group for whatever reasons they have, although they are merely a completely benevolent group of bicyclists out to have a good time. If the mass of bikes were normal looking road bikes belonging to the local touring club, I can almost gaurantee that the police would have at least gave a notice or warning to remove them. I realize that there isn't really a law requiring the police to give warning, but they knew who the bikes belonged to, and could have very easily asked them to find another place to keep them.

Originally posted by gonesh9
, but they knew who the bikes belonged to, and could have very easily asked them to find another place to keep them.

I don't think they knew. And given the circumstance, and explanation here, it seems that they had them blended in with CM'ers.

i think the police have a problem with this group because they are non-conformist in the sense that they do their own thing and go their own way, and are not ashamed of it.

you can think of it this way. if some well-adjusted and charming football player in high school walks in late to class and flashes a smile at the teacher and says sorry, the teacher may just say it's ok, and go on with things. if a punker walks in late and says sorry, the teacher may crack down because the teacher senses the punker may need extra "attention." the fact remain though that they were both late to class. there is a bias, and there are forces in high school and in society at large that encourage being a part of an acceptable and established group.

this has nothing to do with conspiracy theory. it is a hard look at how the police treat different groups differently. there is a concerted effort toward conformity, and the institution of the police is a tool to acheive this. so you can rightly expect that, like the teacher, the police may enforce laws incongruously to encourage conformity. this is not to say that someone didn't complain. that is a possibility. however, i very much doubt rocco's pizza would complain, seeing how they get quite a bit of business from their restaurant being home base for zoobomb. and again, if someone did complain, the normal procedure is to warn them to move the bikes, and then take them if they haven't moved them. from those i've spoken to, there was no such warning. and again, it may be a respnse from hurt pride because the police excluded zoobomb from riding tri-met, and the higher powers threw it out as discriminatory. so the tri-met police, i'm sure, were looking to retaliate somehow from being put in their place.

scott larkin
gobybicycle.com

Originally posted by gobybicycle.com
i think the police have a problem with this group because they are non-conformist in the sense that they do their own thing and go their own way, and are not ashamed of it.

you can think of it this way. if some well-adjusted and charming football player in high school walks in late to class and flashes a smile at the teacher and says sorry, the teacher may just say it's ok, and go on with things. if a punker walks in late and says sorry, the teacher may crack down because the teacher senses the punker may need extra "attention." the fact remain though that they were both late to class. there is a bias, and there are forces in high school and in society at large that encourage being a part of an acceptable and established group.

this has nothing to do with conspiracy theory. it is a hard look at how the police treat different groups differently. there is a concerted effort toward conformity, and the institution of the police is a tool to acheive this. so you can rightly expect that, like the teacher, the police may enforce laws incongruously to encourage conformity. this is not to say that someone didn't complain. that is a possibility. however, i very much doubt rocco's pizza would complain, seeing how they get quite a bit of business from their restaurant being home base for zoobomb. and again, if someone did complain, the normal procedure is to warn them to move the bikes, and then take them if they haven't moved them. from those i've spoken to, there was no such warning. and again, it may be a respnse from hurt pride because the police excluded zoobomb from riding tri-met, and the higher powers threw it out as discriminatory. so the tri-met police, i'm sure, were looking to retaliate somehow from being put in their place.

scott larkin
gobybicycle.com

Scott,

You have put an intellegent response here. However, it belays a sort of Naitivity. High school and society have many parallels, however, I don' think that you can relate that to this situation. Conformity to societal ideals is one thing, however, conformity to laws is another. But let's put it this way, in light of your analogy of the Punker vs. Football player (which I find really funny).
The law is the law. And they (the bike riders) broke the law.

I can't question who did or did not approve of it. However, I doubt that the pizza place cares that much for the bikers in a money matter, esp, if by the facts you place here, the cyclist only arrive there one day a week. Just not a large enough percentage of profits. The pizza place may be concerned that the cyclist have a lack of concern for property. This as demonstrated by thier practices of loading a bike rack and calling it art. So the pizza place may want to move them on in a back door kind of way, with out drama, as they are proven, again by your statements, capable of doing.

I seriously disagree about a concerted effort towards conformity by Law enforcement. I believe that law enforcement can be biased, and can be single out certian groups of people. And I believe that can be unfair in most cases. However, police are people, and the police do not try to enforce conformity and popularity as a goal.

Zoobombs have already proven once they can defeat an unfair enforcement by going through the legal system. They should attempt to in this case too.

Be the above as it is, I believe it's ethically wrong for them to leave bikes there for a week at a time. It's unfair use of public equipement.

Originally posted by gonesh9
they are merely a completely benevolent group of bicyclists out to have a good time.

Somehow, I doubt this.http://www.zoobomb.org/image/view_photo.php?full=1&set_albumName=album27&id=pic10

Look at this thing (http://www.zoobomb.org/image/view_photo.php?set_albumName=MiniBikeSummer&id=RatPack) and now it's clear, these are not even the bikes they use all the time. So by thier own admission, the bikes are left there for a prolonged period of time. Just odd.

Counter culture, and likable, but odd.

Originally posted by William Karsten
I doubt that the pizza place cares that much for the bikers in a money matter, esp, if by the facts you place here, the cyclist only arrive there one day a week. Just not a large enough percentage of profits. The pizza place may be concerned that the cyclist have a lack of concern for property.

William, I don't think you understand. This is Portland, and it's a bit different of a place than southern California. Counterculture thrives here. Rocco's Pizza embraces the zoobomb. There are zoobombers that work at Rocco's. Zoobombers hang out there during the week and eat pizza and have been known to drink a beer or two. Rocco's pizza is their downtown home base. It has made Rocco's pizza more popular and profitable. Do you understand now? There is zero animosity between Rocco's and the zoobombers. You seem to be jumping to all these conclusions, William. I hope I have made it clear that zoobombers were in no way detrimental to Rocco's pizza.

Also, the police DID know who's bikes they were. Tri-met, the light-rail system here, was instrumental in the decision to take the bikes, because they do not like the fact that zoobombers have the right to ride their train.

Whether it was wrong for them to leave the bikes there all week or not is not the issue. The issue is that the zoobombers were unfairly singled out because they ride silly bikes.

Your picture of the bike jousting was funny. :) They recently helped organized a mini-bike summer festival, and bike-jousting was one of the events. Their action in the cycling community here has risen the awareness of bicycles greatly, without breaking any laws other than I guess leaving their extra bikes in a pile next to Rocco's pizza.

Well, I understand more clearly about the relationship with the Pizza place, according to the info you gave me.But you said one thing that you've overlooked.


Originally posted by gonesh9 Whether it was wrong for them to leave the bikes there all week or not is not the issue.

Actually, that's the entire issue. If there was no law about it, or city ord., then the bikes would remain. But since there is, there is always the promise that the police can take them. And the police have that right, even if they do it selectively. (the selectiveness is wrong in itself though). And that's where the basis of the arguement should be, the legality of the code that the police used to take them away. Attack that, and you've taken the wind out of the sail.

Originally posted by William Karsten
And the police have that right, even if they do it selectively. (the selectiveness is wrong in itself though

I guess people just look at things differently... I'm grateful to live in a society where that is the case. :)

I agree that the police had the right by law, but to me the issue of this thread was the wrongfulness of the police actions regarding their selectivity. I believe it outweighs the mistake the cyclists may have made. When police screw up, to me it is our duty to try to correct their policies. After all, they are here to serve and protect their employers, which is us....

Originally posted by gobybicycle.com
but then why didn't the police give a warning that the bikes needed to be moved as they would for an abandoned car?


well, according to the article (http://www.zoobomb.org/image/view_photo.php?set_albumName=MiniBikeSummer&id=RatPack) clipped from some paper on the Zoobomber site, they were notified in print that the transportation department wanted the bikes gone. IMHO they were warned, and warned plenty.



i think we are all in agreement that we support bicycling and peaceful and creative bicycle culture, so why are there so many who are willing, in fact eager, to kowtow to the police?


Scott, I do not "kowtow" to anyone, nor does anyone else here that I am aware of. That is dangerously close to an ad hominem attack and thoroughly counterproductive.

The reason many of us are not opposed to what the police did is simple:

filling up a public bike rack or sidewalk with unused crappy bicycles and leaving them there permanently on the off chance you might need them someday is being inconsiderate of others. It doesn't matter if there are other bike racks, or if the bikes give room for people to pass, it looks bad and gives cyclists a bad name.

So, in closing, just because we are advocates for bicycling and bicyclists in general, does not mean we have to advocate jerky behavior of folks that happen to have bicycles.

take care,

Jester

P.S. Re the police being selective in their enforcement: was another huge pile of bicycles in portland locked to public property left alone? Didn't think so.

Originally posted by gonesh9
I agree that the police had the right by law, but to me the issue of this thread was the wrongfulness of the police actions regarding their selectivity. I believe it outweighs the mistake the cyclists may have made. When police screw up, to me it is our duty to try to correct their policies.
You can badger all you like about the selective issue, and I won't disagree. But the police were within thier rights to preform the action.


After all, they are here to serve and protect their employers, which is us.... [/B]

We are the reason for them being here, however, we are not thier employers. Police are, by virtue of law, required to prevent us from certain actions, and to restrain us to that purpose. If we were thier direct employers as you see them, they would not be able to preform thier actions in the manner they need to.

At any rate, it appears there are conflicting stories about what actually happen, so I'll step out of this debate.

as for the ad hominem about "kowtowing," i'm sorry if anyone took offense.

i do not know if it is illegal to park bikes for an extended period of time, and i do not know if there is a limit to the number of bikes per rack. i'm not sure if this has been established.

that being said, i don't trust anyone who follows laws just because they are laws. i stop at red lights because it makes sense, not because it is the law.

socrates was legally executed. slavery was legal in the united states. (please do not think that i'm comparing this issue to slavery, etc., i'm just using these as extreme examples of how the law has the potential of being immoral, and to follow the law because it is the law is directly opposed to the basic principles that this country was founded upon.) i'm with jefferson and thoreau when they say that that government governs best which governs least, or not at all.

i do think the issue of parking the bikes there is the main one though. i also think it is central the way the police handled the situation. the article that is linked to above does not say that they were informed in writing to move them, it just said that the dept of trans. grumbled about the bikes being there. even if they were informed in writing, i would oppose it if there was no consensus against the bikes from the community. in other words, if the community is fine with the bikes being there, then leave them alone. if they have a problem, then the police should step in if necessary, which brings us back to governing least. let the community decide what happens. like i said, i do not know if a formal complaint was filed or not.

i do, however, think that the police are the gatekeepers of acceptable opinion and acceptable behavior, though, as are teachers in school. one example. during "fleet week," or whatever it's called, military boats pass through portland. people hung up signs on freeway overpasses, american flags, support our troops, god bless america, etc. without any consequence. one guy hung up a sign that said "weapons of mass destruction: nothing to celebrate." he was arrested for hanging a sign without a permit. all others were left alone. this is a clear example of police selectivity, and i think my example about high school is staunch.

scott

Well, either way good luck with the endevaour. And please remember, that you represent all cyclist in a round about way.

Originally posted by gobybicycle.com
people hung up signs on freeway overpasses, american flags, support our troops, god bless america, etc. without any consequence. one guy hung up a sign that said "weapons of mass destruction: nothing to celebrate." he was arrested for hanging a sign without a permit. all others were left alone. this is a clear example of police selectivity...

Scott,

that story about the sign is a clear example of selectivity and is wrong.

However, for that sign story to paralell the situation with the pile of bicycles, there would have to be other piles of bicycles on the sidewalks left alone because of their political views.

There were no other piles of bicycles, ergo, the law was not selectively enforced in this case.

Good luck,

Jester

(thread hi jack).

I think that sign was distastefull and disrespectful.

Originally posted by William Karsten
(thread hi jack).

I think that sign was distastefull and disrespectful.

Well, wether you think that or not:

a) that sentiment belongs in the political forum.
b) our constitution provides that the laws have to apply to people equally regardless of the content of their message. The police acted inappropriately there.

Honestly, you lost a bit of my respect here. You went on and on about how the law was how we should judge the people that put piles of bicycles on the sidewalk. Now, the moment someone points out where the law should have been applied in a manner counter to your beliefs, you conveniently ignore the law.

The servicemen the parade was for risked their lives to protect that persons right to fly that sign. The police by arresting that protestor while exercising his constitutionally protected right to free speech and dissent insulted the servicemen far more than the protestor ever could.

That polceman was stepping on the costitution that the servicemen take an oath to protect, the very reason for their service and sacrifice.

Good luck,

Jester

william--nevertheless, does that make the actions of the police justified? especially in a country that prides itself on freedom? the whole point of freedom of expression is to tolerate the exact viewpoint which you despise. so to selectively enforce an obscure law to supress dissidence is what i call totalitarian. granted there are no death squads, but it is nevertheless a concerted effort of discourage debate.

an open disrespect of authority is a sign of health. a lack thereof is a sign of subjugation.

jester--i was using that example not as a direct comparison, but as a way the police are in fact selective, as you pointed out. i think the police have decided that zoobomb's behavior is undesirable because they cannot categorize it, and therefore they are trying to stamp it out and harass them because they are different. they see them as a potential threat because they are not doing what all good and responsible citizens are supposed to do, that is, go bowling, watch sitcoms, etc.

scott

Originally posted by gobybicycle.com
i think the police have decided that zoobomb's behavior is undesirable because they cannot categorize it, and therefore they are trying to stamp it out and harass them because they are different.

Scott, you will never convince me a pile of bicycles in the middle of the sidewalk indefinitely is a good idea. Since there are laws against that kind of thing, you will likewise never convince me the police acted inapproapriately by removing them.

Lets agree to disgaree, and good luck in your endeavors.

take care,

Jester

Originally posted by jester69
[B]Well, wether you think that or not:

a) that sentiment belongs in the political forum.
Moderate me then.



b) our constitution provides that the laws have to apply to people equally regardless of the content of their message. The police acted inappropriately there.

I never said they acted correctly.


Honestly, you lost a bit of my respect here.

I'm hurt.

You went on and on about how the law was how we should judge the people that put piles of bicycles on the sidewalk. I wrote nothing of judging the Zoobomb group. The law is the law, for all.


Now, the moment someone points out where the law should have been applied in a manner counter to your beliefs, you conveniently ignore the law.

Nope. I didn't ignore the law. I said the the person who put that up was distastefull and disrespectful. In fact, I made no comment on the legality of it all.

Did you read my post?


The servicemen the parade was for risked their lives to protect that persons right to fly that sign.
Yes, and I'm one of those servicemen. There's service women too.



The police by arresting that protestor while exercising his constitutionally protected right to free speech and dissent insulted the servicemen far more than the protestor ever could.
If the sign was put up with out proper permits, then, it was again selective police action.. which I've said elsewhere is wrong. He has a right to say what he wants.



Servicemen and women take an oath to uphold the constituton. Learn what it says, its a good document.

And to add to that since you're willing to take me to task. When I RE TOOK my Oath about a year ago, I gave up many of my rights to defend those rights. I gave up my right to make any negative comments about senior leadership, Congress, or the President. I did this willingly.

I've re read my post, and stand by my call that it was disrespectful (that is, not respectfull to the service men and women).
I've re read my post and stand by my call that is was distastefull.
That is, that it was with out good taste to bring a political arguement to people who have voluntarily given up their right to participate in such an arguement in order to maintain other's rights.

If you disagree with that fine.

But, I did not say he can't do it. Nor did I even say it was legal or illegal.

You almost upset me with this.
But you're allowed to drool to.

PM me so we can settle this out. Or not.

Here I am, at the highest road in San Diego County, taking my Oath.

jester--i was never arguing in favor of leaving the bicycles there. if the community sees it as a problem, then i would be the first to ask zoobomb to move them. and to be clear, they are not in the middle of the sidewalk. they are not blocking anything.

however, what i'm opposed to is the police confiscating the bicycles and refusing to return them, even though they know who the rightful owners are. this is a bully tactic that is not intended to enforce the law, but to retaliate, as i said before possibly for the police exclusion from public transportation being overturned.

i think you and i do agree, but there is a lack of facts. i don't know if they were warned, if someone complained, if someone tripped, what the law says, etc.

if i get more facts along the way which will help clarify the situation, i'll post them.

scott

Originally posted by Stor Mand
If the bikes were stacked in front of someone business, is there a chance that said business complained and that's why they were removed or are you going to say it's a conspiracy against bikers by the man? ;)

The closest business is the pizza shop, which supports the group and visa versa. The bikes have been moved from in front of several other business that may have had reason to complain, and they were in front of a little-used parking lot at the time of confiscation.

Originally posted by William Karsten
I don't think they knew. And given the circumstance, and explanation here, it seems that they had them blended in with CM'ers.

The police absolutely knew who the bikes belonged to and that if they confiscated the bikes on a Friday night the zoobombers would not be able to reclaim the bikes until Monday AM, after the usual scheduled Sunday night ride. The zoobomb ride has nothing whatsoever to do with CM. The same cops had been involved in a previous incident, in which they attempted to ban the zoobomb group from the light rail trains. They pay their fares, they obey the transit regs; these cops are way out of line and on a full-blown ego trip. They certainly have something better to do with their time, like for instance chasing after real criminals.

The preamble to the United States Constitution states, "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Clearly the Constitution was created to form a government who's sole purpose was to serve the People and for no other purpose. The founding fathers went to great pains to ensure, through the separation of powers and the balance of power that no branch of government would ever become dominate and become a force that rules the People rather than serves the People.

This branch of government has failed to serve the people, and in this case has attempted to rule the people. The people of Portland didn't have a problem with the bikes being there. If you take a good look at THIS POSTING: (http://www.zoobomb.org/image/view_photo.php?set_albumName=MiniBikeSummer&id=RatPack) and you will notice that it was awarded "Best Brat Pack". The weekly newspaper here sometimes runs a "Best of Portland" article, outlining the places and things around town that make Portland great. Maybe they should have put them somewhere else, or maybe there wasn't anything wrong with leaving them there. The problem is that the police acted on their own will against a group they have a problem with, against the will of the people of their community. If they really just wanted the bikes stored somewhere else, they would have given the zoobombers a warning, and just asked them to put them somewhere else, or else they would have to take them.