What about people who are disabled and can only get around in a vehicle? Do you think they should drive less? I mean, I guess they could stay home more or something...

Bicyclists are so smug. Nobody else thinks they're better than other people.

haha. very funny elenchos!

My new favorite phrase when irked: "god damn compassion." :)

Kristin, a car is not the only way a disabled individual can get around. This is a complete logical fallacy. Metro is quite prepared and equipped for disabled persons.

I guess that I should say that basically it is easier to get around in a car or specially equipped vehicle if you are disabled...I'm sure metro is well equipped for disabled people...with "vehicles" though, not with bikes. I was just trying to say that not everyone is able to ride a bike. It makes me mad, because most of the time able-bodied people don't think about people who are not able-bodied.

That all may be, but it's irrelevent to Toasterhedgehog's post. You seemed to take a basic and neutral fact ("We should all be driving less"), personally on the part of the disabled. l was simply pointing out that Metro buses *are* specially equipped to carry anyone (and there's a whole fleet for elderly/disabled passengers), and therefore being disabled doesn't excuse one from getting around.

But to tie it back into the conversation, l would point out that Metro drivers are far more aware of cyclists than your typical motorist, both for their size and because they pull over so often they *have* to be. l'm not scared of buses on the road, because at least they are trained to be alert. Seems you can get any old license at Walmart nowadays.

It's not just disabled people. Bicycling has nothing to offer the elderly, or those with small children, or those whose jobs require non-casual attire but don't offer luxurious perks like showers and lockers. Or those who live very far or who aren't up to the challenge of inclement weather.

Bicycle advocacy is often a canard, distracting attention from the pressing need for a real rapid transit system that can serve everyone.

It's no accident that many of those who don't want to spend money on a real solution are happy to support phony greenwashing like "sharrows" and cheap, do-nothing "bicycle awareness" campaigns. Why lay rail lines when you can hand out a couple "Give them 3 feet" bumper stickers?

When did this become an all-bike/no transit debate? Who said anything about forcing everyone (including those that can't) to ride bikes versus having rail lines. Bike-friendly people and rapid transit are not mutually exclusive. l don't recall anyone saying that here. So is this just an opportunity to trash bikers?

For the record, l want rapid transit, but l also want safe roads. That's all l care about, anyway. l could give a crap about shoving bikes down the throats of those who aren't interested in them. l just want them to know l'm there, and to simply watch out.

I said we should all drive less. I didn't say that we should all stop driving. I'm here a bit late, and so I don't think anyone will read this. Our whole infrastructure in this country is designed and built for the benefit of the auto and gass industries. life can be very difficult without access to a car, but I stand by what I wrote, even if it had no bearing on what some readers reacted to. We should all find ways to use less fossil fuel by cutting down on the ammount of driving we do.

Agreed.

Amen.

I'm anti-car accident and anti-Critical Mass. People get enraged all the time at drivers who deliberately or carelessly create accidents. We send them to prison, in fact, and shug when they get ass-raped.

The difference between car accidents and Critical Mass is that nobody is a big enough asshole to write comments defending their right to cause car accidents.

Fucking hooligans, can't even frame a simple, logical argument.

Thank you, elenchos, for beating me to the rhetorical punch.

l'm speaking only for myself here, but since it's not apparent which hooligans you're referring to, l thought l'd clarify my own statement.

l don't think congesting traffic is the way to make a point. l don't think a group that huge can be controlled, nor that they can be expected to be courteous if they feel they're being deliberately endangered. l certainly don't think that setting up a situation that is likely to incite anger and violence -and make cyclists feel endangered for any reason, even if they aren't- is a good idea.

But l have to consider that the problems inspiring CM to begin with were big enough that they warranted some attention, and maybe they weren't getting any. To be honest, l've no idea if Seattle had any particular incidents or issues in mind when it took up the CM movement, but l'm sure some participants did.

Again, l'll say that clogging up the roads and pissing off any number and variety of impatient, self-righteous, and entitled drivers is not the best way of soliciting good manners on the road. The whole thing is too volatile. But l wonder occasionally if mass rides like the World Naked Bike Ride cause this much consternation. Other than among soccer moms and puritanicals.

The problems caused by cars are an excuse used by Critical Mass to have their fun. Critical Mass isn't offering a solution and they aren't interested in constructive work.

There are responsible bicyclists who don't think with their fists and who are willing to work to make things better, such as the Cascade Bicycle Club. The hooligans trade on the goodwill created by clubs like that in order to fool the public into thinking they are "raising awareness" and "protesting."

You can probably figure for every minute some angry dude spends riding with CM, he has destroyed about an hour of the labor of a grown-up bike activist.

l don't disagree with you.

It's that, on bikes. Then they block roads.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22critical+mass%22&l=1

So, what's it called when it's just people suddenly congregating? Is that a different term or event?

And what does pressing the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button on LMGTFY do differently that a Google search?

Thanks.

Yr thinking of a flash mob.

"I guess I just don't know what the point is. Do they want everyone to ride bikes? all the time? Do they want to be an angry mob?"

No, no, and no.

"Do they just want people to pay attention to bicyclists?"

Yes.

"Do they even know how hard it is to see someone on a bike when you are driving???"

Yes. Which is kind of the fuckin point. lt is not a driver's responsibility if a cyclist or biker is driving irresponsibly, and without gear. lt is the cyclist's responsibility to do whatever they must to be safe. But that doesn't always do the trick because if the driver isn't paying attention, they run the risk of injuring or killing a cyclist no matter how much precaution is taken. How many living beings -pedestrians, children, animals- are killed every year, and whose deaths could be avoided had the driver who hit them been sober/paying attention/not doing their makeup, yakking on their cellphone, or whatever other distracting things bored/impatient drivers do to pass the time? The fact is, a lot of people on this planet don't respect the power of the big fucking hunk of metal they're operating, and many learn the hard way, either by killing others, themselves, or both.

lt isn't finally about the cyclists themselves, but the point is that a car does far more damage to a cyclist or pedestrian than either can do to a car, unless it's the dents sustained by someone bouncing off one's hood and over the car.

This doesn't change my opinion that CM won't make a difference if they don't change their methods and organize themselves better. But it still means that, disabled or not, drivers should be focused on the road, and any potential dangers, as long as they're behind the wheel.

"Do they just want to be part of some bike gang? To prove they are cool or something? I don't know."

Yes, it's quite apparent that you don't.

I'm sorry freikja. I seem to only make you mad. :( I don't really know why people think they can zoom around in cars without being responsible either. I think it would be great fun to ride in the city, except that it really is so dangerous it is too scary. I mean, even riding by parked cars is scary. I don't know how cyclists do it!

I don't really have a problem with cyclists individually. Just with cyclists who think that all cars should be banned and EVERYONE should be riding a bike instead. It seems unrealistic.

I'm really sorry for again raising your ire. I should try not to be so flippant. Oy! I really totally agree that people should pay attention when driving. AND that people should especially NOT drive when they are intoxicated.

l admit l'm being curt, but l'm not angry. However, l occasionally wonder how much thought you've put into an answer. For example, you ask questions that make assumptions regarding CM that indicate how little you know about the event. A lot of those people are families, regular people who support the awareness of bikes, and consider it a fun event for the most part. But even though a few bad apples might appear to spoil the whole bunch, that's not always true. l know several people who participate in CM who are responsible, peaceful cyclists looking to make a point. Unfortunately, a few people keep ruining it for them.

Look, l don't like eco-cyclists who are fanatical about the takedown of fuel-driven vehicles, but that's not what we're talking about, because only a fraction of CMers are that kind of fanatic.