Advocacy & Safety - NYC Files Lawsuit to Stop Critical Mass

Reposted from New York City Independent Media Center:
New York City filed a lawsuit today in an effort to stop the monthly critical mass ride. They are asking a judge to grant them an injunction enjoining "all other participants in Critical Mass bicycle rides form engaging in conduct that requires a permit without having first obtained such a permit."

This of course begs the question: does riding a bike require a permit? Critical Mass has been a feature in New York City for nearly a decade, but over the last three months the city's commitment to stopping the ride has deepened since they set their sights on riders at the August Critical Mass which coincided with the start of the Republican National Convention.
While the original suit, filed by five plaintiffs whose locs were cut and bicycles seized by the NYPD during September's Critical Mass focused very narrowly on the question of their rights to due process. They claim in their federal suit that the NYPD is violating their fifth amendment right to due process by seizing their property without charging them with any crime.

The City countered the cyclists' lawsuit with a counter suit that includes a request for an injunction to stop the ride from happening this Friday, October 29. If the judge grants the injunction, anyone who participates in Critical Mass could be found in contempt of federal court.

In their countersuit, the city denies the allegations in the original lawsuit. It's an incredibly interesting suit, and they have recourse to a lot of prior cases that involve many salient issues but few related to bicycles. The judge's ruling on this injunction is important well beyond the confines of NYC, because it is a federal case.

There are some powerful issues at stake about the rights of cyclists. This case, which started out as a very narrow demand that the city not steal bicycles may turn out to set dramatic precidents about cyclists' rights. Is it legal to require a permit for riding more than two abreast? What constitutes a parade? These questions have been answered with respect to pedestrians, but cyclists have a right to ride in city streets, and it isn't at all clear that we can be subjected to the same kinds of restrictions as pedestrians. And if we can, what of cars? Can the NYPD arrest drivers who drive in a procession? Just how different is Critical Mass from rush hour in any city?

There will be a public hearing on Wednesday, time and place to be determined. Watch this space for updates.
(See comments re: the article here: http://nyc.indymedia.org/feature/display/128206/index.php )

The full text of all filings is at http://info.interactivist.net.

If they can stop bikes from riding in a group, can they finally get those Harley gangs off the streets as well?

IANAL (I am not a lawyer) nor do I play one on television. However, if I were the judge and heard the fact that the Critical Mass ride has been happening nearly monthly for almost ten years, and the city was just *now* getting upset about it, I'd throw the case out because of the length of time it's been going on. Especially if NYPD has known about it and mayhaps even the city has promoted it. Just my take on it - then again, I may be reading too much GROKLAW lately. ;)

Yeah, but things escalated (on both sides) during the convention. Some CM regulars have complained on this forum that people with non-cyclist issues have hijacked the rides. This is largely CM's fault. The "organization" prides itself on a lack of organization and leadership, which makes it easy prey for trouble-makers with other issues.

I hope the judge finds a way to let the rides continue, but if CM is to continue in NY, I think it's going to need to start showing some discipline.

Edited to make sense (hopefully)

I'm really curious... who exactly are they going to serve this lawsuit to? Who's the party being named? It's not like there's some kind of Critical Mass office or something? CM as I understand it is purely a gathering. There's no central organising body.

I'm really curious... who exactly are they going to serve this lawsuit to? Who's the party being named? It's not like there's some kind of Critical Mass office or something? CM as I understand it is purely a gathering. There's no central organising body.

Legally, they probably can't sue anyone as such if the ride is an "organised co-incidence" as we're often told it is. On the other hand, they might be seeking an injunction, which would simply mean that it's not allowed to proceed as normal. Given some of the complaints CM riders have had about police behaviour in the past, it could open up a legal loophole for the police to arrest and detain the participants, which could be all the city is seeking.

I tend to think CM needs a little refinement to be truly effective. To ride in one great big mass really doesn't help all that much because most people can see it for what it is (i.e. a protest). I think what CM needs to do is break up into smaller groups, and instead of reclaiming one street at a time, reclaim several. This has the added advantage of being visible to more people, and being able to slide through traffic faster than the cars are moving (the real advantage of using a bicycle as transport). Of course, it would also set this legal action right back to square one.

CM's.... are bad.

The CM people way over-did-it.
They will have to find other ways to get their point across.

how about reclaim the streets as in:

http://www.reclaimthestreets.net/

Are they also going to file an injunction to stop the Republican party from holding further conventions there?

...
I tend to think CM needs a little refinement to be truly effective. To ride in one great big mass really doesn't help all that much because most people can see it for what it is (i.e. a protest). I think what CM needs to do is break up into smaller groups, and instead of reclaiming one street at a time, reclaim several. This has the added advantage of being visible to more people, and being able to slide through traffic faster than the cars are moving
...



Exactly.
Instead of making motorists red-hot angry, the goals of CM would be better served if it was done in such a way that motorists want to _join_ the cyclists, either because it is easier to travel that way or because it is attractive.

Unlike CM in other cities, the New York Critical Mass are in fact organized and an group called Time's Up pretty much controls (or has hijacked) the NYC Critical Mass.

www.times-up.org

The NewYork CM break up was politicaly motivated they were aressting people whom were not in the CM ride at all from the same area any howww ,, there are some who will fight for the freedom and the right to ride a bike and stand up and there are others whom won't and complain about CM's and will B***tch about bad drivers and unsafe roads ,,, remember it was alot people from CM that fought for bike lanes in this City (toronto) and other citys and for more rights for us bike riders and groups that have lawyers for bike riders to fight these nasty drivers and give us support ( CM is more than riding just riding one day a month in a group ) :) ...Steeker

Sort of off-topic:

If the proponents of CM rides would organize 20k or 30k road races or if that requires to much time or official sanction, then informal road rallys, I believe that would be a better way to get cagers to coexist with cyclists.

Even rallys of a few hundred people or less, if held regularly enough would make the point. Drivers would get used to seeing them on the road and over time would learn to accept cyclists as legitimate road users. Poker runs or rally races for charity are not bad marketing devices.

On the topic at hand, if someone wants to stop a CM then they will have to shut down the road completely. There is no official CM organization, and it seems silly to have a judge hold someone riding their bicycle on a Friday afternoon on a public street in contempt. Silly as it seems, if they manage to pull it off, it still accomplishes nothing. The CM would just reform somewhere else and eventually force the judge to ban public assemblies on bicycles everywhere in the city.

I think the cure is worse than the disease.

Dan

CM'S are good :roflmao:

The NewYork CM break up was politicaly motivated . . . .remember it was alot people from CM that fought for bike lanes in this City (toronto) and other citys and for more rights for us bike riders ...Steeker
If CM fights for bike lanes (and other forms of bike ghettos), I hope they fail. Cyclists need fair access to the roads, not "special" facilities for insecure cyclists. Bike lanes are a traffic engineer's means of getting cyclists off the part of the road cars use.

Apparently, all other crime has been stopped in NYC. Now if they can just get rid of those damn bicycles, the city will be pure utopia. I can certainly see why manpower, and tax dollars are being wasted, erh ah, I mean “wisely spent” on such an obviously critical (no pun intended) issue in NYC. :rolleyes:

If CM fights for bike lanes (and other forms of bike ghettos), I hope they fail. Cyclists need fair access to the roads, not "special" facilities for insecure cyclists. Bike lanes are a traffic engineer's means of getting cyclists off the part of the road cars use. Uhmmmmmm insecure cyclists :eek: well yaa some times you have to be insecure ,,, drivers kill bike riders all the time with VERY few drivers being charged ,paint ball guns shot at bike riders , bottles thrown at them , run off the road on purpose by drivers. KILLED!!> and it has happened on purpose with charges droped against the driver,, dam even Lace Armstrong was run off the road in Texas, so yaa being a little bit insecure keeps you alert on the road about the nutbag cagers ( besides bike riders were on the road before cars came along and with the gas crisas comming there'll be less off them :beer: .Steeker

well, they've been sucking all the fun out of the city for a decade or more now, why not take a shot at this.

Steeker,
Being careful is important, but being insecure can be dangerous. Bike lanes wouldn't have kept the Texas rednecks from running Lance Armstrong into a ditch. Road paint won't stop a maniac. And remember, mandatory sidepath laws often force cyclists to use bike lanes, effectively kicking us off of the road.

I always thought CM fought to get cyclists the right to use the road. I never thought CM would fight to get us confined to bike ghettos. Apparently, I was wrong.

The more I learn about CM, the less I like. They appear to be a lot of self-indulgent children (regardless of their real age) who throw traffic temper tantrums in the hopes of getting some kind of validation from motorists.

last month i was in prospect park on a friday (for those who don't know new york - that's brooklyn's version of central park) night while the brooklyn cm was going on. there were about 40 cyclists all riding through the park peacefully. surrounding them where an equal number of motorcycle cops - behind, in front, all around. lights flashing, etc... there were also police vans and busses in case of arrests. all this for a relatively small group of cyclists riding through THE PARK on a friday evening. it was absurd. just like a police state. i want my city back!

last month i was in prospect park on a friday (for those who don't know new york - that's brooklyn's version of central park) night while the brooklyn cm was going on. there were about 40 cyclists all riding through the park peacefully. surrounding them where an equal number of motorcycle cops - behind, in front, all around. lights flashing, etc... there were also police vans and busses in case of arrests. all this for a relatively small group of cyclists riding through THE PARK on a friday evening. it was absurd. just like a police state. i want my city back!

Unlike other cities, they will never get CM off the streets of New York. I remember the day after hundreds of CM cyclists were arrested, they were back on the streets 24 hours later holding ANOTHER ride right through New York City streets. There are laws against what CM does in almost every state but each one is disregarded because it costs THOUSANDS in police overtime pay each month to arrest all those cyclists.

I haven't read all the responses but I think their angle is that CM is a protest not a group ride and most cities require permits for such a thing.

last month i was in prospect park on a friday (for those who don't know new york - that's brooklyn's version of central park) night while the brooklyn cm was going on. there were about 40 cyclists all riding through the park peacefully. surrounding them where an equal number of motorcycle cops - behind, in front, all around. lights flashing, etc... there were also police vans and busses in case of arrests. all this for a relatively small group of cyclists riding through THE PARK on a friday evening. it was absurd. just like a police state. i want my city back!



are you serious??? that loop is so removed from everything it would seem pointless for the police to be there. It's more a track than a route through residential/commercial areas; there's no traffic to be interfered with, and no bystanders to witness any sort of spectacle...I've seen that many riders there on a good day.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in that same park, people are getting hassled/mugged etc. etc...

Unlike other cities, they will never get CM off the streets of New York. I remember the day after hundreds of CM cyclists were arrested, they were back on the streets 24 hours later holding ANOTHER ride right through New York City streets. There are laws against what CM does in almost every state but each one is disregarded because it costs THOUSANDS in police overtime pay each month to arrest all those cyclists.
But have they used federal court orders in the other states? Even if (big if) some sort of notice argument stops the city from enforcing an injunction on the first ride, it can probably serve the order on everyone it arrests for violating laws during that ride. Then, if the people violate the order on the next ride, the riders could find themselves in contempt.

Once you start getting held in contempt, significant fines and jail time become a real possibility. And since it is a federal court, it is much easier to track down assets nationwide. Some of the riders may not think being held in contempt is a big deal now. But a federal contempt citation and asset collection can dog you once you enter the "real world," if not before.

Remember, even Martin Luther King never violated a federal injunction. Is CM better than MLK? I don't think so.

Riding a bike does not require a permit. Neither does walking. But demonstrations do require one. A CM ride is basically a demonstration using bikes instead of feet.

FYI: The key documents of the case are here (http://info.interactivist.net/article.pl?sid=04/10/26/0042213&mode=nested&tid=14&tid=1). Read them for yourself.

Remember, even Martin Luther King never violated a federal injunction. Is CM better than MLK? I don't think so.

You sure about that? See here, under "Challengers of the final years"

He determined to lead a second march, despite an injunction by a federal court and efforts from Washington to persuade him to cancel it. Heading a procession of 1,500 marchers, black and white, he set out across Pettus Bridge outside Selma until the group came to a barricade of state troopers. (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/reference/articles/martin_luther_king.html)

You sure about that? See here, under "Challengers of the final years"

He determined to lead a second march, despite an injunction by a federal court and efforts from Washington to persuade him to cancel it. Heading a procession of 1,500 marchers, black and white, he set out across Pettus Bridge outside Selma until the group came to a barricade of state troopers. (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/reference/articles/martin_luther_king.html)
Point taken, but the article says he went to the barricade, but he did not cross. He even followed the route the governor personally gave him. Finally, he backed down when he reached the police line, something CM didn't do.

If CM fights for bike lanes (and other forms of bike ghettos), I hope they fail. Cyclists need fair access to the roads, not "special" facilities for insecure cyclists. Bike lanes are a traffic engineer's means of getting cyclists off the part of the road cars use.

I would very much like a wide bike lane. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to use the road and be unintelligent enough to believe I am safe, however, I am not, so I want a bike lane. You've got to remember that the average street IQ (without curve killers) is around 80. In other words, a whole lot of people out there are really pathetic.

Point taken, but the article says he went to the barricade, but he did not cross. He even followed the route the governor personally gave him. Finally, he backed down when he reached the police line, something CM didn't do.

The organization of the march and starting it violated the injunction. He turned around to avoid violence.

The bottom line is; comparing CM (a supposedly unorganized, leaderless event who's purpose to to promote bicycle advocacy) to the work of MLK is giving far too much credit to one group, and far too little to another. CM isn't fighting to preserve the rights of a protected class, to enure basic constitutional rights -- they're working for something a little less grandiose. State troopers aren't beating cylicists for being in CM.

Have you even ridden in Columbus's CM? or are you basing the claim that CM participants are "self indulgent children who throw temper tantrums to get some validation from motorists" on what you've read, or just your knowledge of me? I'd urge you to come out, just because i want to hear you argue the evils of bike lanes to another of our regulars, a bike lane advocate who has worked to have them used in several cities.

. . . . The bottom line is; comparing CM (a supposedly unorganized, leaderless event who's purpose to to promote bicycle advocacy) to the work of MLK is giving far too much credit to one group, and far too little to another. CM isn't fighting to preserve the rights of a protected class, to enure basic constitutional rights -- they're working for something a little less grandiose. State troopers aren't beating cylicists for being in CM.

Have you even ridden in Columbus's CM? or are you basing the claim that CM participants are "self indulgent children who throw temper tantrums to get some validation from motorists" on what you've read, or just your knowledge of me? I'd urge you to come out, just because i want to hear you argue the evils of bike lanes to another of our regulars, a bike lane advocate who has worked to have them used in several cities.
My knowledge of CM comes mostly from what its supporters say on this site. I did not know you were a part of it, so don't take the comment personally. And you are right, I did give CM too much credit by comparing it to MLK.

My knowledge of CM comes mostly from what its supporters say on this site. I did not know you were a part of it, so don't take the comment personally. And you are right, I did give CM too much credit by comparing it to MLK.

Nah, i didn't take it personally, i was merely kidding about myself being one of those "children".

But, isn't proudly taking and owning the lane, maintaining your speed, even when it angers drivers just another form of self-undulgence and validation? You seem to think that when drivers yell at CM riders, the riders feel validated cause they're pissing off the driving public. When a driver honks at you for riding legally, as you do, don't you fell validated because you feel like you're teaching them what bikers are allowed to do?

"Proudly taking and owning the lane, maintaining your speed" is what I do to and from work each day. If CM follows the law, I have no problem with it. If CM riders break the law and willingly accepts the punishment, I think they are being counter-productive, but I can respect them. But I have no respect for CM riders who break the law and then whine about being punished.

And I apologize for that MLK stuff. That was a stupid diversion on my part.

CM's ruined by all those crazy bikers who just wanna get out and make a lot of noise and also those who have their own political agendas.

If a whole bunch of us, say like 40-50 of us, were to leave around the same time and take the same main arteries around town and then split when we get near work, that'll be cool. Just a lot of bikers, obeying the law, commuting to work, together.

I know on certain stretches of road in NYC, cars have begun to accept bikers, like caroll street in brooklyn since a lot of bikers use that street every day to cut into downtown brooklyn.

If a whole bunch of us, say like 40-50 of us, were to leave around the same time and take the same main arteries around town and then split when we get near work, that'll be cool. Just a lot of bikers, obeying the law, commuting to work, together.


That would be cool

. . . .I know on certain stretches of road in NYC, cars have begun to accept bikers, like caroll street in brooklyn since a lot of bikers use that street every day to cut into downtown brooklyn.
Coming back to my pet topic, are there bike lanes on those roads that cars are starting to accept cyclists?

Thanks to NY bike lanes, the kind of thing CM says it wants, the NYPD has yet another reason to ticket cyclists. The department targets cyclists who are smart enough to avoid government bike ghettos (http://www.transalt.org/press/magazine/013Summer/17bikelanes.html). And it looks like bike lanes increased the accident rate on another street. According to the City's own study (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/pdf/orientalblvd.pdf), when the city put in bike lanes, overall traffic dropped significantly, but they had the exact same number of accidents. There was no breakdown as to whether cyclists had become more or less safe. I wonder why?

Less traffic, same number of accidents. Hmmmm. Is that effective transportation engineering? There was increased bike traffic on the streets with new lanes, but I couldn't find any evidence that new riders had started cycling.

I also noticed that one of the biggest advocates of NY bike lanes is not a bike group, but an anti-car group, Transportation Alternatives (http://www.transalt.org). We cyclists need to watch out for organizations that lump us in with perdestrians instead of with other vehicles. I've noticed there are very few true pro-bike groups out there. Even CM appears to have been taken over by people with a bunch of miscellaneous leftist causes

CM's ruined by all those crazy bikers who just wanna get out and make a lot of noise and also those who have their own political agendas.

It's so hard to find good old organized anarchy these days.

Coming back to my pet topic, are there bike lanes on those roads that cars are starting to accept cyclists?

Thanks to NY bike lanes, the kind of thing CM says it wants, the NYPD has yet another reason to ticket cyclists. The department targets cyclists who are smart enough to avoid government bike ghettos (http://www.transalt.org/press/magazine/013Summer/17bikelanes.html). And it looks like bike lanes increased the accident rate on another street.

That's the biggest load of sh*t I ever heard. I go down centre street through chinatown and they've gotten used to bikes enough that people actually watch out for them. No bike lane either. I use bike lanes, haven't had a car cut me off either, in fact every accident I've ever had whether it be my fault or another cars' was NOT in a bike lane. I don't use bike lanes if I don't have to, I enjoy the draft behind cars.

Wow... All I can say...

Okay I'll try to say a bit more. Critical Mass is not an organization, it's not a protest, it's not a entity, it's an event, and it happens on the last friday of every month all over the world. Who organizes the event? Well everyone that rides it. Who leads the group? Everone that rides it.

So the bike lane thing? CM is not for bike lanes or against bike lanes. Some of the people who are very involved in CM, are also very involved in pro/anti bike lanes.

Why do people ride CM? Various reasons, some want to piss off motorists, some want to be rebels, some want people to see them and take note of the cyclists, some want people to see them and think "Hey, I can do that too", some just want to have a good time.

Almost all of us (cyclists) that ride in traffic have to deal with being alone, and worry at least to some degree about safety. CM is a ride where one isn't alone and one is in big enough of a group that they don't need to worry about safety as much.

I encourage people to ride their local CM, if you don't like it, change it, you're just as much a leader as anyone else, if you are unsuccessful it's because the "mass" doesn't agree with you. Anarchy, democracy, it's the same really.

http://www.criticalmassrides.info/ (And remember, the author of this site is not CM, and is not CM-sponsored, or CM-supported, or anything, just some guy that wanted to make a site)


-Kevin (Proud rider of both Detroit and Chicago Critical Mass)

I think a lot of people also forget, a bike is not a car.
Imagine this: next time you're on your group ride, I'm going to haul a bunch of fat people from the local mcdonalds, give em huffy's and stick them in your path. Ok? Good luck dodging 2000 out of shape people doing 6 mph on walmart bikes while your group's doing 30mph down the road.
And once again to those who b1tch and whine about being arrested, what's so hard about obeying the law?
I agree, I don't obey the law, I run lights with the cops around, I'll sneak by police cars at red lights and run them, they don't do anything, I keep going. If I get caught, I'm stupid, I accept the consequences. The people who whine about CM being oppressed deserve to whine when they can bike within the law.
Either that or we can stoop to the same level as the other moron drivers. I, for one, would prefer not to go down to their level.

Almost all of us (cyclists) that ride in traffic have to deal with being alone, and worry at least to some degree about safety. CM is a ride where one isn't alone and one is in big enough of a group that they don't need to worry about safety as much.
-Kevin (Proud rider of both Detroit and Chicago Critical Mass)

When I ride to work down 5th avenue, I catch up with a lot of cyclists and I'll usually stick with them so we have a small group of 2-3 of us. It's fun plus it's a group of us and we get to go with the cars, people don't try to cut in, etc.

Once again I see that the safety forum has turned its eyes on critical mass and that the majority of you happen to be out of state. If any of you have studied bicycle activism and what it usually consists of you will find that it is primarily environmental. The american republican party dose not tend to fight for environmental issues so critical mass has found a niche in americas left wing. Ending on a more personal note I am tired of breathing in smog and diesel emissions wile I am in transit on the streets so I support the hard core actions taken by the global critical mass movement to promote cycling as a viable form of short distance transportation over cars.


Just to add another point, dose not a suit and action against critical mass infringe on all us NYC cyclists who want to ride as groups (trigger happy and creative cops). Also lets not forget how unsuccessful mayor Coch's midtown bike ban was.

There are lots of people who demonstrate to support their cause. We can all identify and agree with some of these many causes. We can also all disagree with some of them. However, I'd bet that in any major city in the US, a demonstration for any of these causes requires a permit. If you want to demonstrate against police tactics, you need a permit. If you want to demonstrate in favor of police tactics you need a permit. It's that simple. The permit system allows the city to ensure that there is sufficient protection, including traffic routing, street blockage, and police presence to protect both the public and the demonstrators.

CMers seem to believe that, having no formal organization or leadership, they are immune from permit requirements or their enforcement. This is certainly not true and although cities have, so far, been reluctant to take specific legal action, it appears that NYC has decided to set a precident. Going to Federal court is certainly no accident. If they are successful (as they will almost certainly will be since CM has no resources to mount an opposition!) the court ruling will be used by every major city in the US that wishes to curtal CM.

CMers are going to have to make a choice. In the current form, CM will either have to become more confrontational with local authorities, or fade away to oblivion. There's not likely to be any middle ground. If the movment goes confrontational it's likely to turn violent. In either case, any hope of effective cycling advocacy will be lost.

Alternatively, the few CMers who really have been the behind the scenes leadership could step forward and create a formal Critical Mass organization. They will need to shed the arnarchist tone and decide what causes they really stand for. Then, as an organization, they can work within the law to promote their causes. There's plenty of room for a new major cycling advocate. I'll bet few CMers have even heard of the League of American Bicyclists let alone would consider joining them.

Creating a formal organization is really not such a bad idea. There are certainly plenty of prospective members who are current participants. An organization that can put together large demonstrations nationwide is one that does get the attention of politicians and one that could really influence change. The biggest hurdle may be how to convince current CMers to go mainstream since one of the attractions of CM seems to be the anarchy.

There are lots of people who demonstrate to support their cause. We can all identify and agree with some of these many causes. We can also all disagree with some of them. However, I'd bet that in any major city in the US, a demonstration for any of these causes requires a permit. If you want to demonstrate against police tactics, you need a permit. If you want to demonstrate in favor of police tactics you need a permit. It's that simple. The permit system allows the city to ensure that there is sufficient protection, including traffic routing, street blockage, and police presence to protect both the public and the demonstrators.


Generally speaking, demonstrations in New York City usually require permits. And that usually results in a police escort along a route either negotiated with, or determined by NYPD, allowing one or more lanes where demonstrators can march.

However, there are plenty of unpermitted demonstrations where demonstrators either march on the sidewalk, like any other pedestrian, or if there are a significant number, the police allow them to march in the street anyway. One of the things to keep in mind is that Critical Mass has been going on in Manhattan, every month, for 10 years, wiithout a permit.

As a New York City cyclist this article seems to raise more questions than it answers. NYPD didn't stop the recent Critical Mass in Brooklyn, though according to Time's Up website, NYPD did provide an escort through Prospect Park which was closed to traffic anway.

I also don't understand how NYPD determines whether a particular cyclist is a protester and possibly in violation of this court order. Is any cyclist in the vicinity of Critical Mass subject to arrest? If I happen to stop for a red light and several other cyclists stop alongside me, are we all subject to arrest? If 30 citizens on cycles disrupt traffic and pose a possible threat, why is it OK for 30 cops on bikes to do the same thing?

During the RNC a group of cyclists were caught up in NYPD fish nets and arrested. According to our local news channel, NY!, the cyclists hadn't obviously broken any law. Also, at least a third of the protesters arrtested during the RNC had to be released because NYPD never filed any charges.

If NYPD or the City expects cyclists to obey the law they have to clarify these new laws. Gramted there are cyclists out there trying to make a political point, but originary people shouldn't be arrested and held without charges for two or three days, simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Stacy

I ride hard core year round in bike lanes on street in parks and on trails , I ride in CM , in traffic equal time in day and night all the time -30 -40 and 110 humidity and higher rain or sun : CM has haters and advocates the bottom line for me is that bike riding is PURE FREEDOM and I will fight for it , you ride your way and we stand up front and ride our way :roflmao: . Steeker

. . . Critical Mass is not an organization, it's not a protest, it's not a entity, it's an event, and it happens on the last friday of every month all over the world. Who organizes the event? Well everyone that rides it. Who leads the group? Everone that rides it.

So the bike lane thing? CM is not for bike lanes or against bike lanes. Some of the people who are very involved in CM, are also very involved in pro/anti bike lanes.

Why do people ride CM? Various reasons, some want to piss off motorists, some want to be rebels, some want people to see them and take note of the cyclists, some want people to see them and think "Hey, I can do that too", some just want to have a good time. . . . Anarchy, democracy, it's the same really. . . .

This explains why CM can't keep out the idiots. If you brag about not having anyone in charge and about having no rules, you can't complain when yahoos with non-cycling agendas hijack your events. And "Anarchy, democracy, it's the same really," is not a serious thought.



. . . If any of you have studied bicycle activism and what it usually consists of you will find that it is primarily environmental. . . .

The agenda of environmentalists overlaps with the cycling agenda, but the two are not identical. Some things that are good for cars are also good for bikes, better road maintenance, for one. Some things that promote the environment are bad for cycling as transportation. Building bike lanes, side paths, and some bike paths, for example. Those things encourage recreational cycling, but are of little (notice I did not say "zero") value to cyclists trying to get from point A to point B. As I've explained in other threads, separate bike facilities can actually make transportational cycling more difficult.


And finally, I posted a link to the documents from the court case in Post #27. Take a look.

In any democracy, the needs of a minority will not be met unless they are vigorously defended. The majority and their perspectives will dominate any discussion and the making of the resulting laws. Because cyclists are the clear minority on the roads, we are all at risk of having our safety, rights, concerns attacked through the interests of those who utilize automobiles.

Minorities who are successful in defending their rights (or advancing their cause) tend to have both advocacy and activism elements in their quest for a public hearing of their concerns. The advocacy part is the calm, law abiding, diplomatic approach that I hear many of you articulate. Activism is not calm, is not law abiding, and is not diplomatic. People were offended when black people refused to go to the back of the bus or rode in freedom rides through the south.

I view the CM rides as activism, and a necessary part of cyclists' struggle to maintain and advance our interests on the roads and streets.

You know, it seems sadly typical that the focus of our criticism regarding CM is that it makes car drivers angry. In my view, the CM rides are not about cars, they are about BIKES. How drivers react is secondary to the empowerment and community building of cyclists. OF course car drivers get angry. They get angry all the time: at each other, at peds, at lights, at trucks, and at me while I am obeying every law and riding safely.

I don't agree with CM on every issue or all of their tactics. However I believe they play an essential role for us in this democracy. Therefore, this attack by NYC is an attack on all of us and I hope it is resisted as vigorously by advocates as they resist for us as activists.

Well, Friday is CM day, and I will be there, in SF, home of the original CM.

Live free or die.

I think a lot of people also forget, a bike is not a car.
Imagine this: next time you're on your group ride, I'm going to haul a bunch of fat people from the local mcdonalds, give em huffy's and stick them in your path. Ok? Good luck dodging 2000 out of shape people doing 6 mph on walmart bikes while your group's doing 30mph down the road.

I don't know about NYC, but in Pittsburgh our CM goes at about 6mph the entire time. We stay together and go slow for everyone.

A bike is not a car, I agree, but we deserve respect. CM may or may not be the best way to get it.