Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks

Tom Keats

In article <vfh2gvs9qjff45938t1mu91m7bumf4bj4p@4ax.com>,
Mayhem <mayhem@hotmail.com> writes:

> Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
> you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
> RIGHT. You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
> have the RIGHT to enter my front door.

Public streets & roads are a Commons, and as such are free to
Everyone's use. That's how they're "public". Put another way,
it's not the access per se to them that is regulated, it is the
vehicles upon them. Your front door is not a Commons. Your
impression is wrong.

And cyclists have a right to use public roads, except under
express restriction or prohibition.


cheers, & IANAL,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

AustinBoston

Mayhem <mayhem@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<vfh2gvs9qjff45938t1mu91m7bumf4bj4p@4ax.com>...
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:41:39 -0700, "Just a Cyclist"
> <popo@copwatch.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Tom Keats" <tomk2003@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:lksqdb.rd5.ln@bud.garden.local...
> >> In article <vg1qo95489unf7@corp.supernews.com>,
> >> "Just a Cyclist" <popo@copwatch.com> writes:
> >> >
> >> > So blocking a street so I can't walk across it is not stomping on my
> >> > rights?? Pure BS
> >>
> >> So how come cars get away with it all the time, but a few
> >> minutes per month of bikes doing it, and some ppl gotta
> >> run around with their hair on fire about it?
> >
> >Good we are changing the subject........yes they are violating my right to
> >cross the street! It is a right!
>
> Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
> you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
> RIGHT.

What part of "right of way" do you not understand? Leagally, a Public
Road is either a "public way" (the public has the right to use it, and
the government the responsibility to maintian it) or a "right of way"
(the public has the right to use it, but is not required to maintain
it). The public includes pedestrians, bicycles, horses, oxen,
horse-drawn carriages, farm equipment, tractors, mopeds...

I think you are confusing this with "private right-of-way" where a
specific agreement, history of usage, or ruling gives a specific
individual or group a right to use specific land for passage. a
private right-of-way is _not_ a public road or public way.

> You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
> have the RIGHT to enter my front door. I will afford you the privilege
> but not the right, likewise with yourself crossing a road; a PUBLIC
> road.

What country are you in? Were you aware that in the United States,
the pedestrian sidewalk is part of the highway?

Public right-of-way rules have been in existence for centuries, long
before the advent of the automobile. No priviledge had to be granted
to use the roads, and no one could tell you you could not use the
roads...not even the courts. (That sounds to me like a right, not a
priviledge.)

When automobiles started appearing, it was quickly recognized that
they posed a much greater hazard to other road users. I may be
mistaken, but I believe it was Henry Ford himself who was involved in
the first major automobile accident. After that, he began advocating
licensure of motor vehcile operators. Doing so recognized that motor
vehicle operators do not have a _right_ to operate on the roads. The
license was a form of priviledge granted to an individual to operate a
motor vehicle on the road. It granted restricted "rights" but because
it could be revoked it was still legally a priveledge. IIRC, Henery
Ford was granted the first license to operate motor vehicles in the
US.

At no point (before or since) has the public's right to use the roads
been repealed, revoked, or even significantly altered. These
road-use-by-right users include pedestrians, bicycles, horses (and
other beasts of burden), horse-drawn carriages, tractors and other
farm equipment, and mopeds, among others.

There are some very limited exceptions, and they must be posted. They
are almost always "limited access divided highways" (and in some
places, even limited access divided highways allow bicycles). The
next time you enter one with your car, note the sign. It says
something like "Pedestrians, bicycles, horses, horse-drawn carriages,
tractors and other farm equipment, and mopeds prohibited". Why the
sign? Because everyone (the legislature, the courts, law enforcement
officers, and the public) assume that you have the right to use the
road unless otherwise posted. The _right_ to use the road, not
priveledge.

Austin

Chalo

"Ted" <testing@testing.com> wrote:

> Ok, the next time you are laying in your yard near death, have one of your
> CM buddies bike you to the hospital. No need to suck up to an auto. Also
> make sure the paramedics do not suck up to an auto by driving to your house.
> They can also bike or walk there.

Why would he be in such a state unless he'd been maimed by a car driver?

Chalo

Tom Keats

In article <efda1256.0307012041.186c9116@posting.google.com>,
Robert.Tyrrell@Verizon.net (SouthBayBent) writes:
> "Ted" <testing@testing.com> wrote in message news:<F5fMa.1427$fi1.434098210@twister1.starband.net>...
>> Ok, the next time you are laying in your yard near death, have one of your
>> CM buddies bike you to the hospital. No need to suck up to an auto. Also
>> make sure the paramedics do not suck up to an auto by driving to your house.
>> They can also bike or walk there.
>
> No one is saying "eliminate ALL moror vehicles." I recommend you seek
> balance. Balance in your use of polluting and greener technologies.
> Try balancing your selfish indignation with reasoned argument, your
> need to attempt clever posts with reading and comprehending the
> thread.

Sounds good to me.

> speaking of balancing I'm still trying to reconcile driving my gas
> guzzling and paid for SUV and commuting on my Lightning Phantom.

Let your own conscience be your guide. It'll know what to do,
regardless of what anyone else says.

> Who
> should I suck up to?

Nobody.

> The damn autos or the CM bas**rds?


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Al Simon

Well, several members of "Critical Mass" were arrested in Grand Rapids,
Michigan last week for blocking downtown traffic for some time. They give
cycling a bad name and put us in the same camp as the "Earth Liberation
Front", just not quite as destructive.


"David Sutton" <david@sutton.org> wrote in message
news:BB23D12F.597F%david@sutton.org...
> >To all cyclists who supported the Critical Mass ride through the
> >Melbourne domain tunnel, thanks a lot. As a competative cyclist I
> >have had to put up with increase abuse while training today because
> >of your stupidity last night. Unfortunately many motorist think we
> >are one in the same and have been giving more abuse today than we
> >normally recieve just for sharing the road. Just a coincidence, I
> >dont think so!
>
>
> For a start, you might want to get your facts straight. It was the BURNLEY
> Tunnel, not the Domain Tunnel. And any increase in abuse which you
> (allegedly) received can be put squarely on the shoulders of the
apoplectic
> radio jocks who spent hours (literally) talking about how the world was
> going to end because people couldn't drive through their precious tunnel.
> For the record, here's some press clippings from AFTER the event which
> reflect the reality of the situation:
>
>
> Herald Sun
> "Police said the protest caused only a minor disruption and they were
happy
> with the conduct of the protesters"
>
> The Age
> "VicRoads traffic controllers said the event did not seem to have caused
> congestion in other parts of the city"
> "After police drove through the closed tunnel at 6.30pm, the first five
> cyclists entered from Power Street at 6.35pm. The rest entered from Kings
> Way two minutes later. The tunnel was reopened at 7.15pm."
>
>
> So, far from the projected chaos on the roads, the resulting effect on
> traffic caused barely a ripple, according to the authorities. And the
tunnel
> was closed for a total of 45 minutes -- far from the 2 hours which the
radio
> jocks were screaming about.
>
>
>
> >Why don't you look at the constructive lead taken by Bicycle Victoria,
> >who promote safe road use for all users. They lobbying Local and State
> >governments in the provision of cycle safe roads. They also promote rides
> >that introduce thousands of non cyclist to the sport, which in turn
> >educates a large group of the population on the benifits of bicycle
> >commuting and hence reduces the use of cars.
>
>
> Among the 20 or so Critical Mass riders that I am friendly with, we are
> involved in the following bicycle advocacy projects. Personally, I spend
> time working on almost every item on this list:
>
> * forming and running successful Bicycle User Groups (BUGs) to promote
> cycling and lobby for better cycling facilities
> * lobbying government & authorities at all levels, in conjunction with BV
> * producing educative and informational cycling newsletters and
publications
> * sitting on local government cycling advisory committees
> * working with local government & BV to create Bike Plans for council
areas
> * lobbying local council directly for bike lanes (many CM riders have been
> involved in a campaign to get lanes on Chapel St, which finally looks like
> it may happen)
> * maintaining cycling email lists & websites
> * writing articles for local newspapers and "BV News"
> * planning for a "Melbourne Bike Week" next summer
> * working on mode-shift programs which encourage people to consider
cycling
> rather than driving
> * planning & hosting social rides open to the general public
> (and this is not even mentioning work by CM'ers in the areas of public
> transport & environmental advocacy)
>
> The vast bulk of this work is unpaid & voluntary, and involves a huge
> commitment of personal time from many diverse individuals. It would amount
> to hundreds of hours spent on cycling advocacy each month -- and that's
only
> speaking for the 20 people that I know personally. I can't even begin to
> speak for the other 430 riders who were at CM last night.
>
> You are WAY off the mark when you paint us as outlaws. We work within the
> system 99% of the time, and often we work hand-in-hand with Bicycle
> Victoria. If you don't believe me, then ring up BV and ask them. And you
> moigyt be interested to know that although BV does not endorse Critical
Mass
> (nor would we ever ask it to) there are many individuals who work for BV
who
> ride in CM.
>
> We are not just activists, we are also advocates. Yet once a month when we
> put on our party hats at CM, people like you get up on your high horse and
> slag us off for being cowboys. Well, let me ask you, SH, what have you
done
> lately to promote cycling or improve cycling facilities?
>
>
>
> >You riders want a society with out cars, its not going to happen, get
> >over it. What will happen with the publicity that you short sighted
> >radicals get, is there will be a wider devide between motorist and us.
> >This will just make it more dangerous to ride, discourage people from
> >riding and undo all the good BV and simular groups have achieved.
>
>
> I think YOU should get over it. Car use is an environmental, health,
> resource use, land use and pollution issue. It's time people realised that
> our current addiction to cars is completely unsustainable. And if it takes
> CM to do it, then fine.
>
> CM is global, and we're not going away. Come along to a CM ride some time
> (last Friday of the month, 5.30pm, State Library) and experience the joy
of
> it all. You might even like it!
>

Jym Dyer

> Well, several members of "Critical Mass" were arrested in
> Grand Rapids, Michigan last week for blocking downtown traffic
> for some time. They give cycling a bad name and put us in the
> same camp as the "Earth Liberation Front", just not quite as
> destructive.

=v= How, exactly, do you justify this bizarre comparison?
<_Jym_>

P.S.: Followups trimmed to only the relevant newsgroups.

Robert Haston

Hell, I block traffic with my car every time I drive, and no one yells for
me to be thrown in jail or compares me to a terrorist.

I just don't get the claim that a bunch of bicyclists can effectively block
people in big heavy cars, either the presence or lack of cops prevent that.
Every account of arrest I have seen has been cops hauling cyclists off to
jail for infractions they often don't bother to ticket drivers for.

Besides, how do you demonstrate nicely for bicycling? Ride around the Mega
Mall parking lot after it closes so you don't inconvenience anyone?

The really sad part is unless there is a chance of arrests, the media won't
cover it. I would suggest you bring lots of video cameras, piss off as many
drivers as possible without breaking the law, film them screaming at you, or
threatening you with their cars, and film the cops overstepping their
bounds.

Not that I would bother where I live. Maybe after another 15 years of bike
commuting, gas might be expensive enough to consider rallying the troops.

For now (to borrow the Army's slogan) I'm a Critical Mass of One. Back to
the garage to finish my fiberglass tailbox.


"Al Simon" <agksimon@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:s9mdnTM_lat6-nrdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
> Well, several members of "Critical Mass" were arrested in Grand Rapids,
> Michigan last week for blocking downtown traffic for some time. They give
> cycling a bad name and put us in the same camp as the "Earth Liberation
> Front", just not quite as destructive.
>
>
> "David Sutton" <david@sutton.org> wrote in message
> news:BB23D12F.597F%david@sutton.org...
> > >To all cyclists who supported the Critical Mass ride through the
> > >Melbourne domain tunnel, thanks a lot. As a competative cyclist I
> > >have had to put up with increase abuse while training today because
> > >of your stupidity last night. Unfortunately many motorist think we
> > >are one in the same and have been giving more abuse today than we
> > >normally recieve just for sharing the road. Just a coincidence, I
> > >dont think so!
> >
> >
> > For a start, you might want to get your facts straight. It was the
BURNLEY
> > Tunnel, not the Domain Tunnel. And any increase in abuse which you
> > (allegedly) received can be put squarely on the shoulders of the
> apoplectic
> > radio jocks who spent hours (literally) talking about how the world was
> > going to end because people couldn't drive through their precious
tunnel.
> > For the record, here's some press clippings from AFTER the event which
> > reflect the reality of the situation:
> >
> >
> > Herald Sun
> > "Police said the protest caused only a minor disruption and they were
> happy
> > with the conduct of the protesters"
> >
> > The Age
> > "VicRoads traffic controllers said the event did not seem to have caused
> > congestion in other parts of the city"
> > "After police drove through the closed tunnel at 6.30pm, the first five
> > cyclists entered from Power Street at 6.35pm. The rest entered from
Kings
> > Way two minutes later. The tunnel was reopened at 7.15pm."
> >
> >
> > So, far from the projected chaos on the roads, the resulting effect on
> > traffic caused barely a ripple, according to the authorities. And the
> tunnel
> > was closed for a total of 45 minutes -- far from the 2 hours which the
> radio
> > jocks were screaming about.
> >
> >
> >
> > >Why don't you look at the constructive lead taken by Bicycle Victoria,
> > >who promote safe road use for all users. They lobbying Local and State
> > >governments in the provision of cycle safe roads. They also promote
rides
> > >that introduce thousands of non cyclist to the sport, which in turn
> > >educates a large group of the population on the benifits of bicycle
> > >commuting and hence reduces the use of cars.
> >
> >
> > Among the 20 or so Critical Mass riders that I am friendly with, we are
> > involved in the following bicycle advocacy projects. Personally, I spend
> > time working on almost every item on this list:
> >
> > * forming and running successful Bicycle User Groups (BUGs) to promote
> > cycling and lobby for better cycling facilities
> > * lobbying government & authorities at all levels, in conjunction with
BV
> > * producing educative and informational cycling newsletters and
> publications
> > * sitting on local government cycling advisory committees
> > * working with local government & BV to create Bike Plans for council
> areas
> > * lobbying local council directly for bike lanes (many CM riders have
been
> > involved in a campaign to get lanes on Chapel St, which finally looks
like
> > it may happen)
> > * maintaining cycling email lists & websites
> > * writing articles for local newspapers and "BV News"
> > * planning for a "Melbourne Bike Week" next summer
> > * working on mode-shift programs which encourage people to consider
> cycling
> > rather than driving
> > * planning & hosting social rides open to the general public
> > (and this is not even mentioning work by CM'ers in the areas of public
> > transport & environmental advocacy)
> >
> > The vast bulk of this work is unpaid & voluntary, and involves a huge
> > commitment of personal time from many diverse individuals. It would
amount
> > to hundreds of hours spent on cycling advocacy each month -- and that's
> only
> > speaking for the 20 people that I know personally. I can't even begin to
> > speak for the other 430 riders who were at CM last night.
> >
> > You are WAY off the mark when you paint us as outlaws. We work within
the
> > system 99% of the time, and often we work hand-in-hand with Bicycle
> > Victoria. If you don't believe me, then ring up BV and ask them. And you
> > moigyt be interested to know that although BV does not endorse Critical
> Mass
> > (nor would we ever ask it to) there are many individuals who work for BV
> who
> > ride in CM.
> >
> > We are not just activists, we are also advocates. Yet once a month when
we
> > put on our party hats at CM, people like you get up on your high horse
and
> > slag us off for being cowboys. Well, let me ask you, SH, what have you
> done
> > lately to promote cycling or improve cycling facilities?
> >
> >
> >
> > >You riders want a society with out cars, its not going to happen, get
> > >over it. What will happen with the publicity that you short sighted
> > >radicals get, is there will be a wider devide between motorist and us.
> > >This will just make it more dangerous to ride, discourage people from
> > >riding and undo all the good BV and simular groups have achieved.
> >
> >
> > I think YOU should get over it. Car use is an environmental, health,
> > resource use, land use and pollution issue. It's time people realised
that
> > our current addiction to cars is completely unsustainable. And if it
takes
> > CM to do it, then fine.
> >
> > CM is global, and we're not going away. Come along to a CM ride some
time
> > (last Friday of the month, 5.30pm, State Library) and experience the joy
> of
> > it all. You might even like it!
> >
>
>

Luigi de Guzman

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 15:19:25 GMT, "Robert Haston"
<rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:

>The really sad part is unless there is a chance of arrests, the media won't
>cover it. I would suggest you bring lots of video cameras, piss off as many
>drivers as possible without breaking the law, film them screaming at you, or
>threatening you with their cars, and film the cops overstepping their
>bounds.

How does this help cyclists?

You get a reputation, sure, and coverage. As what? Provocative
assholes in traffic. You are creating road rage *on purpose*, and
bringing down upon yourselves PRECISELY the same behaviours which you
will complain or demonstrate about.

Yes, I am also a "CM of One" when I ride, but I'm not going to do
anything to gratuitously provoke motorists. Why give them any reason
to harrass otherwise law-abiding cyclists?

Riding in one large mass is fine, but needless provocation is
counterproductive.

-Luigi

Robert Haston

Whether it helps or not is hard to measure. Personally I think it doesn't,
and I think lots of people agitate just for the excitement.

If I were to hold a critical mass, my core motive would be to hand out info
telling people that the problem isn't bikes or cars, it is the thousands per
year per citizen our tax laws funnel away from society at large and give
just to those who aren't too young, old, handicapped or poor to drive. It
boggles my mind why the right wing isn't behind this. On the whole, it is
money taken from wealthier people to encourage poorer people to drive more.

Look at something as seemingly innocuous as school bussing. Imagine how our
cities would look today if for the last 100 years, education was socialized,
but transportation wasn't. Having to pay $1-4 a day to bus their kids would
have been a gigantic incentive to keep neighborhoods and schools connected
with side streets and paths. A kid could earn his allowance by biking to
school. They wouldn't be as fat and diabetic. Our streets would be safe
and convenient for cyclists, our laws protecting cyclists would be stronger
and better enforced.

Instead every kid's first lesson is transportation involves big motor
vehicles and it is "free". It gets worse every day as the promise of "free"
school bussing creates more and more dangerous and meandering sprawl.


"Luigi de Guzman" <luigi12081@cox.net> wrote in message
news:6usie0drcflhm1pn9ge2dgg8bsv44b8p85@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 15:19:25 GMT, "Robert Haston"
> <rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >The really sad part is unless there is a chance of arrests, the media
won't
> >cover it. I would suggest you bring lots of video cameras, piss off as
many
> >drivers as possible without breaking the law, film them screaming at you,
or
> >threatening you with their cars, and film the cops overstepping their
> >bounds.
>
> How does this help cyclists?
>
> You get a reputation, sure, and coverage. As what? Provocative
> assholes in traffic. You are creating road rage *on purpose*, and
> bringing down upon yourselves PRECISELY the same behaviours which you
> will complain or demonstrate about.
>
> Yes, I am also a "CM of One" when I ride, but I'm not going to do
> anything to gratuitously provoke motorists. Why give them any reason
> to harrass otherwise law-abiding cyclists?
>
> Riding in one large mass is fine, but needless provocation is
> counterproductive.
>
> -Luigi

Luigi de Guzman

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:07:02 GMT, "Robert Haston"
<rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Whether it helps or not is hard to measure. Personally I think it doesn't,
>and I think lots of people agitate just for the excitement.
>
>If I were to hold a critical mass, my core motive would be to hand out info
>telling people that the problem isn't bikes or cars, it is the thousands per
>year per citizen our tax laws funnel away from society at large and give
>just to those who aren't too young, old, handicapped or poor to drive.

This isn't what you advised. I quote:

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 15:19:25 GMT, "Robert Haston"
<rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:

>... I would suggest you bring lots of video cameras, piss off as many
>drivers as possible without breaking the law, film them screaming at you, or
>threatening you with their cars, and film the cops overstepping their
>bounds.

That's provocation, and an incitement to provocation. So do you get
your jollies by winding up the cops and watching them beat up your
buddies?

As a cyclist, I don't like the guilt-by-association that I get because
of the antisocial and uncivilized behaviour of these yahoos. It
results in more ill-will towards me, and gives motorists justification
for their abuses.

-Luigi

Randy Rhine

An interesting post.

In the house I grew up in, we lived across the street from a elementary
school (my Mom still lives there). There wasn't such a thing as school
buses in the inner city. Those were only used in the rural areas. Part
of what was a grass playground is now a parking lot and in the mornings
and afternoons, it's loaded with buses and cars of people picking
up/delivering their kids.

I assume it's the same at the middle school and high school..both of
which were about a mile away and we walked or rode bikes...only rarely
got a ride.

rr

Robert Haston wrote:

> Whether it helps or not is hard to measure. Personally I think it doesn't,
> and I think lots of people agitate just for the excitement.
>
> If I were to hold a critical mass, my core motive would be to hand out info
> telling people that the problem isn't bikes or cars, it is the thousands per
> year per citizen our tax laws funnel away from society at large and give
> just to those who aren't too young, old, handicapped or poor to drive. It
> boggles my mind why the right wing isn't behind this. On the whole, it is
> money taken from wealthier people to encourage poorer people to drive more.
>
> Look at something as seemingly innocuous as school bussing. Imagine how our
> cities would look today if for the last 100 years, education was socialized,
> but transportation wasn't. Having to pay $1-4 a day to bus their kids would
> have been a gigantic incentive to keep neighborhoods and schools connected
> with side streets and paths. A kid could earn his allowance by biking to
> school. They wouldn't be as fat and diabetic. Our streets would be safe
> and convenient for cyclists, our laws protecting cyclists would be stronger
> and better enforced.
>
> Instead every kid's first lesson is transportation involves big motor
> vehicles and it is "free". It gets worse every day as the promise of "free"
> school bussing creates more and more dangerous and meandering sprawl.
>
>
> "Luigi de Guzman" <luigi12081@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:6usie0drcflhm1pn9ge2dgg8bsv44b8p85@4ax.com...
>
>>On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 15:19:25 GMT, "Robert Haston"
>><rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The really sad part is unless there is a chance of arrests, the media
>
> won't
>
>>>cover it. I would suggest you bring lots of video cameras, piss off as
>
> many
>
>>>drivers as possible without breaking the law, film them screaming at you,
>
> or
>
>>>threatening you with their cars, and film the cops overstepping their
>>>bounds.
>>
>>How does this help cyclists?
>>
>>You get a reputation, sure, and coverage. As what? Provocative
>>assholes in traffic. You are creating road rage *on purpose*, and
>>bringing down upon yourselves PRECISELY the same behaviours which you
>>will complain or demonstrate about.
>>
>>Yes, I am also a "CM of One" when I ride, but I'm not going to do
>>anything to gratuitously provoke motorists. Why give them any reason
>>to harrass otherwise law-abiding cyclists?
>>
>>Riding in one large mass is fine, but needless provocation is
>>counterproductive.
>>
>>-Luigi
>
>
>

Robert Haston

Read it again. The first was my suggestion for those who do get their
jollies agitating. The second was my message, basically the mess we are in
stems from pro auto socialist taxes.

If you believe in agitation, It is better to get video of a bunch of fun
loving, law abiding cyclists getting threatened by psycho motorists and
jacked by out of control cops than to get video of a bunch of asshole
cyclists breaking laws and getting what they deserve.

Nothing gives motorists justification to harass cyclists.

Speaking of which, the first thing we need to fix is the stereotype that all
cyclists belong to some kind of cult, so you can just pick one and get even
with something another one did. How many times have we heard the remark
"you cyclists run lights".

From the complete retards who ride the wrong way at night with no lights, to
the jerks who decide that every traffic rule and device only applies to
cars, they drive me nuts. But I only get mad at the latter.


"Luigi de Guzman" <luigi12081@cox.net> wrote in message
news:rn4je0pjdppc31gcuomkgr2d6ck6b3mnsl@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:07:02 GMT, "Robert Haston"
> <rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Whether it helps or not is hard to measure. Personally I think it
doesn't,
> >and I think lots of people agitate just for the excitement.
> >
> >If I were to hold a critical mass, my core motive would be to hand out
info
> >telling people that the problem isn't bikes or cars, it is the thousands
per
> >year per citizen our tax laws funnel away from society at large and give
> >just to those who aren't too young, old, handicapped or poor to drive.
>
> This isn't what you advised. I quote:
>
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 15:19:25 GMT, "Robert Haston"
> <rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >... I would suggest you bring lots of video cameras, piss off as many
> >drivers as possible without breaking the law, film them screaming at you,
or
> >threatening you with their cars, and film the cops overstepping their
> >bounds.
>
> That's provocation, and an incitement to provocation. So do you get
> your jollies by winding up the cops and watching them beat up your
> buddies?
>
> As a cyclist, I don't like the guilt-by-association that I get because
> of the antisocial and uncivilized behaviour of these yahoos. It
> results in more ill-will towards me, and gives motorists justification
> for their abuses.
>
> -Luigi

Jim Verheul

Amen brother. The conduct of most cyclists embarrasses me. They make a bad
name for all of us. In the US find the average motorist safer than the
average cyclist. Cyclists, motorists, and police seem equally unaware of the
law though.

On the critical mass thing, I have never seen one. I have only read of the
ensuing police violence. I avoid violence, no matter who perpetrates it. I
have heard people say that cyclists block traffic at these events. Cyclists
are traffic. Now if cyclists are doing this just to add to the traffic, that
seems dumb.

And to many of you who cry "share the road": that's a concept that is open
to all kinds of personal interpretation, just like courtesy. How about we
all start by obeying the fucking law first! That seems like a necessary
prerequisite to any unwritten vague guidelines.

I would not be surprised if before I die I get rear ended by another cyclist
when I stop at a stop sign or light. I've hade close calls already. I have
even been yelled at afterwards. How dare I impede someone who is above the
law! I wonder how the case will be recieved in court. I have already been
T-boned (no offence GR) by a cyclist running a stop sign. I guess Ken Dubius
never thought he needed to stop, or that another cyclist might be coming on
the other road.

Right now it seems to me that a cyclist who obeys the law is a minority, and
even an outcast and many circles. People, please think about your conduct on
the road and consider what constructive improvements you could make in your
own behavior before you take to destructive behavior. If you ride with a
team jersey emblazoned with big sponsor logos, think even harder. Not only
can you embarrass the rest of us, but the people you piss off may be able to
read, and use a phone.

JV


"Robert Haston" <rehaston@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<hlJGc.10648$yy1.6217@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>...


From the complete retards who ride the wrong way at night with no lights,
to
the jerks who decide that every traffic rule and device only applies to
cars, they drive me nuts. But I only get mad at the latter.

Alex

"eb" <euan_b_uk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lu8ydu482s.fsf@bridge.enterprise.mylan.com...
> >>>>> "JimG" == Jim Verheul <jverheul@adelphia.net> writes:
>
> JimG> Right now it seems to me that a cyclist who obeys the law is a
> JimG> minority, and even an outcast and many circles.
>
> Sure seems that way to me, although the other day I was hitting every
> red light. Another cyclist was stopping as well and said "seems like
> we're the only ones stopping."
>
> This was in peak hour for goodness sake. Funny, I've only had bother
> from a motorist twice in twelve months of daily commuting. Maybe that's
> because I obey the law? Just a thought.
> --
> Regards
> Euan

The strange thing is that many of these car drivers and or cyclists who get
so infuriated when a cyclist breaks the law, break it themselves in their
lives as pedestrians. I don't know how many mindless pedestrians I see
crossing against red lights. Put these people in cars and they will be
outraged when they see a cyclist doing the same.