Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« "Month of Sundays"--Now with S... | Today the Stranger Suggests »

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

A Modest Proposal

posted by on June 19 at 14:42 PM

During my bicycle commute to work this morning, I was nearly crushed into a paste for stopping at a traffic light. ďYou didnít signal you wanted to go straight through the intersection,Ē screeched the helpful driver. (What is the proper bicycle hand signal for wanting to go straight through an intersection? An extended middle finger?) The unfairness of the situation struck me: How long have the Seattle-area drivers been providing educational opportunities like these for pedestrians and cyclists? There really is no better teacher than a deadly weapon, like four thousand pounds of ineptly controlled steel rubber and glass. Itís the vehicular manslaughter of love, a little death threat to discourage any minor inconvenience to car commuters. How dare we deny drivers their own continuing education? Therefore, I propose that all pedestrians and cyclists in the city be required to carry a weapon. A nice handgun or perhaps an Omar Little-style shotgun. Like drivers running cyclists off the road for using part of a lane, cyclists should be required to threateningly wave their handgun at any driver talking on a cell phone while driving. Incompetent parallel parking on a busy street demands an earnest attempt to end a life, just like any cyclists experiences when daring to use Mercer Street to cross Aurora.

Remember, an armed society makes a polite society.

RSS icon Comments

1

If this were posted by ECB, there would be 30 comments by now. Interesting.

Posted by keshmeshi | June 19, 2007 2:59 PM
2

Here motherfucking here!

Posted by louley | June 19, 2007 3:02 PM
3

But bicyclists already have a weapon that they carry with them always...spit! Just recently I accidentally cut off a cylist as I was making a right turn. As a cyclist myself I know how frustrating that is, so I rolled down my passenger-side window to offer an apology. The cyclist responded by hoching a loogie into my car. It was all I could do not to make this jerk a hood ornament. Let's just say I'm not as righteous a cyclist as I used to be. Drivers, cyclists, both can be jerks, especially if you're a pedestrian.

Posted by Justy | June 19, 2007 3:04 PM
4

Pull a handgun on me, and there isn't a jury in the world that would convict me of crushing your skull.

You pussies on your overgrown childrens toys (bicycles are for 12 year olds, not grown adults) sure like to complain about how you are always persecuted by drivers. Well, The author here has the solution. Get upity and then get killed. Sounds good to me. The fewer smug bikers on the road is much better for our city. I doubt that anyone, who regularly interact with these fools, would deny that if all these underemplyed "enthusiasts" just stopped riding bikes on the road that we would be the least be sad.

BTW: You don't pay for the roads, we (who drive vehicles) so get the fuck off of them.

Posted by ecce homo | June 19, 2007 3:16 PM
5

A bike lock make a pretty good weapon. If you have it mounted beneath your seat, you can grab it, smash a window and make a U-turn out of there before they'd ever have a chance to get near you.

But, yeah, people make mistakes. Save the violence for people intentionally endangering your life. There's plenty of that too, but the vast majority is just simple mistakes which unfortunately risk getting us killed.

Posted by no one in particular | June 19, 2007 3:19 PM
6

Hey #4: You don't pay shit for city roads compared to the bicyclists who use them. Seattle roads are funded through property taxes and sales taxes. And you and your big ass vehicle rip them up and require that we ALL repair them for you. You're welcome.

Posted by DOUG. | June 19, 2007 3:21 PM
7

I make a point to only run down hot guys so I can take them home and nurse them back to health ^_^

Posted by CodyBolt | June 19, 2007 3:22 PM
8

If it's any consolation, drivers are assholes to fellow drivers as well.

It's not just a driver-on-biker issue.

Posted by frederick r | June 19, 2007 3:25 PM
9

i was going to ask: how do we pay for roads in Seattle, King County etc.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 19, 2007 3:28 PM
10

There is a signal for stopping
http://www.inlandempirecycling.com/Cycling/hand_signals.htm
Which can be helpful given that many bikes don't have the red tail lights to tell people they are going to stop.

Posted by Giffy | June 19, 2007 3:29 PM
11

I have the opposite problem. There are people in cars who will arrive at an all-ways stop before me, are on my right, and twiddle their thumbs expecting me to sail through their right of way. Meanwhile you can't predict when someone else at the intersection will get fed up with waiting and turn the thing into a free-for-all. If you have the right of way, I expect you to use it.

Cyclists who expect to go straight through an intersection from the right side of a right turn lane. Know and use your rights of way, people.

People in cars who stop at intersections when I have a stop sign and they don't. What's the international hand symbol for "you're not helping?"

The umpteen spots on the Burke Gilman where the cars get a "yield" and the bicycles get a "stop" or vice versa. How can it ever be safe to deliberately confuse the right of way?

Posted by celeriac | June 19, 2007 3:30 PM
12

underemployed? what? i ride my bike, and i work WAY over 40 hours a week as a paralegal. one of the attorneys i work with rides his bike to work also. i guarantee you that his job as a prosecutor gives him plenty of employment.

Posted by konstantConsumer | June 19, 2007 3:32 PM
13

#6 buy a clue.

I paid more in sales tax on my latest car than you make in a month pulling espresso.

And gas taxes are what pay for a majority of the roads in this city, so bite me.

Posted by ecce homo | June 19, 2007 3:33 PM
14

bicycle/car etiquette is so hard to balance . usually most cars get pissed at bikers when they can't pass them like on lake WA blvd as the bikes take up most of the room. second-of-ly, i rarely see bikers obeying the same traffic laws as cars. they cut through red lights and ride on sidewalks-which is what i would be tempted to do if i were a bicyclist. but i am more of a walkist.

Posted by brad | June 19, 2007 3:33 PM
15

All Seattle drivers and bicyclists are *ssh*oles and desserve each other! Poor pedestrians I say!! Have you ever tried walking across the Fremont or Ballard Bridge with a bike on your ass? Get off and walk it around turd shorts!

Posted by Lloyd Cooney | June 19, 2007 3:43 PM
16

see?!?! SEE?!?! we NEED the catholic church to issue some rules for bicycles to follow, and for drivers to follow when relating to bicyclists.

Posted by infrequent | June 19, 2007 3:45 PM
17

#13: There is no such thing as a city gas tax in Seattle. There's a STATE gas tax that helps fund STATE highways. So the next time you see me riding on the 520 bridge you have my permission to run me over.

Posted by DOUG. | June 19, 2007 3:46 PM
18

This sort of behavior is an unavoidable external cost of auto traffic since it is not feasible to enforce laws that would prevent it.

So the only solution is a) tax tax tax tax until gas costs $5 a gallon b) then apply more use taxes for heavily travelled and tollable roads c) then get rid of free parking anywhere without a residential permit and limit those to one, period. Take some of the revenue to pay for medical expenses of cyclists and pedestrians injured by cars.

If drivers actually had to cover all the external costs that society incurs from driving, hardly anyone could afford to drive. It's a heavily subsidized practice in terms of uncompensated social costs, and we should stop subsidizing it.

Posted by kinaidos | June 19, 2007 3:47 PM
19

Hey Doug,

Its called the local-option gas tax and is imposed by the city.

The City also get an allocation from the state gas tax to pay for street maintanence and construction. It ainst just state highways.

Again, you should go get a payday loan and buy a clue.

Posted by ecce homo | June 19, 2007 3:55 PM
20

There are benefits of people driving cars. Its about balance.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 19, 2007 3:56 PM
21

The problem isn't cars, it's your fellow bicyclists who don't obey the traffic laws.

We drivers don't know if you are going to just blow through stop signs like a pedestrian might or stop like a car would. I don't give a shit either way--I see the justification in not coming to a complete stop, because bicycles are far more agile than cars.

Still, it needs to be one or the other, for your collective safety.

Posted by Seth | June 19, 2007 3:59 PM
22

ecce-

bicyclists do pay for roads, and considering usage and wear, much more in proportion than vehicle drivers do. besides, it is law that we can use them. what is your deal? why so hostile towards all people engaging in a legal act they paid to support and benefits the environment?

Posted by infrequent | June 19, 2007 4:00 PM
23

ecce homo you're funny when YOU get all upity! ...cyclist are pussy 12 yr olds!!! NICE! Keep paying those gas taxes for me...I'd LOVE some more bike lanes!

Posted by 100 miles a week | June 19, 2007 4:02 PM
24

what's strange is that car drivers break laws all the time. it is not like this is a unique problem to bicyclists. i see people speeding, one passanger in the carpool lane, california stops, u-turns, failure to signal, failure to yeild, not wearing seatbelts, and on and on.

yet there seems to be much more venom directed at all cyclists when most are fairly reasonble when interacting with traffic. some people seem to see a cyclist and just get mad.

Posted by infrequent | June 19, 2007 4:07 PM
25

What's a "California Stop"?

Posted by Justy | June 19, 2007 4:11 PM
26

Since a lot of cyclists seem to make up rules as they go along, perhaps instead of issuing them weapons, they need to be issued licenses to ride in the city.

Posted by elswinger | June 19, 2007 4:11 PM
27

We cyclists will get our revenge when overweight stressed-out losers like Ecce Homo keel over from heart attacks at 55 years old. And years before that, the fools who laugh at exercise start to develop diabetes, hypertension and erectile dysfunction. Meanwhile, cyclists stay thin, flexible, happy and horny. Don't waste anymore time or ammunition fighting losers like Ecce. He'll get his.

Posted by Gurldoggie | June 19, 2007 4:12 PM
28

I've come to the conclusion that 95% of all cyclists and 95% of all motorists are fucking idiots.

Cyclists... that white line isn't the bike lane. The OTHER SIDE of that white line is the bike lane. And pedestrians belong on the sideWALKS, not you. So don't get all upity about people walking in your way.

Motorists... get off your god damned phone and drive. If the fucking call is that important pull over and talk away. Also, it's called a turn signal. It helps you SIGNAL that you're about to TURN so that others can be aware and allow you to do so safely. Also, if your cars tires are so bad that a couple drops of water are going to send you flying off the road then maybe you should buy some new fucking tires. If it's just that you're afraid to drive in bad weather then by all means do us a favor and DON'T DRIVE when it's wet out. Oh yeah, and try to watch out for bikes.

Posted by monkey | June 19, 2007 4:17 PM
29

I reccomnend one of these:
http://serbu.com/top/superShorty.php

Posted by Smegmalicious | June 19, 2007 4:21 PM
30
Cyclists... that white line isn't the bike lane. The OTHER SIDE of that white line is the bike lane.

You're probably aware of this, but just to clarify - the law allows cyclists to ride as far to the left as safety requires, whether there's a bike lane or not. It's the cyclist's call. So the cyclist you see riding outside the lane, or on the line, might be avoiding hazards like debris, potholes, or opening car doors.

I'm with you about the sidewalks, though.

Posted by cdc | June 19, 2007 4:23 PM
31

What's the law about cyclists giving pedestrians the right of way in a crosswalk. Usually, as a pedestrian, I will slow down and let the cyclist ride through, but often I am 4/5ths of the way through the intersection when a cyclist will just head straight for me without stopping.

One of these days I'll just let one of you hit me and sue you for your $2,000 bike plus medical.

Posted by elswinger | June 19, 2007 4:30 PM
32

as strange as it may be, it is legal for cyclists to ride on the sidewalks here (although, as with the road, there are certain rules that apply).

Posted by infrequent | June 19, 2007 4:31 PM
33

I complained about bicyclists to a friend: "First they turn into a pedestrian! Then they turn into a car!" I'll try to not kill you regardless, but you all need to be a monolith and choose.
And yeah, wtf's a "California stop"?

Posted by Sarah | June 19, 2007 4:34 PM
34

An automobile is far more of a child's toy than a bicycle. You don't see children playing with model bicycles, do you?

Posted by keshmeshi | June 19, 2007 4:36 PM
35

I assume every driver is going to kill me until evidenced otherwise. I see no problem with riding on the sidewalk to avoid a red light if it is not hampering the movement of peds.

Omar Little- was that the first Wire reference in the Slog! How about this quote "You know why I respect you, not because of all of the cool cop shit you showed me, cuz you know whatever. Its because when it came time for you to fuck me, you bent me over and did it real slow like"

Posted by Lumpy | June 19, 2007 4:36 PM
36

Jonathan- you're new here, aren't you?

Posted by investigatory journlalist | June 19, 2007 4:40 PM
37

I just want to chime in to say that I (as a pedestrian) also see bicyclists breaking the law (e.g., running stop signs or stop lights or not giving me right of way at crosswalks) all the time. Trying to understand, I'd say they're usually trying to preserve momentum, but it's still fucking annoying and dangerous. Makes me less sympathetic to their no doubt justified complaints against car drivers.

Posted by Randy | June 19, 2007 4:41 PM
38

I believe a "california stop" is when you slow down at an intersection but do not stop and just roll through.

Posted by Chris | June 19, 2007 4:42 PM
39

california stop - slowing at a stop sign but not actually stopping. it's slang, and perhaps regional, but i didn't make it up!

and if drivers hate that bicyclists can be on the road or on the sidewalk, change the law. until then, complaining that a cyclist does it -- usually to no one's harm -- is hollow. you might as well complain about one car passing your car on a two lane road in a passing zone or some other legal but more dangerous than parking maneuver.

Posted by infrequent | June 19, 2007 4:43 PM
40

California stop: slowing to a crawl at the stop sign or red light (enough to check for oncoming traffic), then speeding up and proceeding through the intersection (or making a right turn on red) without actually coming to a complete stop.

Posted by spokesperson | June 19, 2007 4:44 PM
41

Ecce Homo: Last I checked there was no local option gas tax in Seattle. And HERE'S a list of what our state gas tax gets us. Not a lot of bikeable miles there.

Posted by DOUG. | June 19, 2007 4:44 PM
42

The difference when a biker breaks the law is that they're not driving 4000 lbs of metal. They may endanger themselves or mildly endanger pedestrians but they're not rising lives by any means.

Posted by Smegmalicious | June 19, 2007 5:08 PM
43

As a person that drives to work in the winter and bikes in the spring and fall, this conversation (which has been on here for the 50th time) always devolves into a debate that my 9th graders would find shockingly immature.

There are bad drivers AND bad bikers. Period. Most bikers follow the law and some blow through stop signs. Amazingly most drivers respect the rights of bikers and a small few try and run us off the road. I am usually more disgusted with other drivers when i am driving, not when I am biking. That said aggressive drivers are a little more likely to kill - bikers, other drivers and pedestrians alike. Also many of us bikers own cars and pay every kind of tax imaginable for roads. The underemployed and barista comments are just silly. Someone on this thread is a very unhappy man.

Posted by lanik | June 19, 2007 5:19 PM
44

Cyclists should pay a "bike tab" fee. They should support road costs and bike lane costs. This would help the cops identify stolen bikes. And hey why not make a number card big enough for a cop to see so that a cop can see a cyclist run a red light and issue a ticket.

No one whould use the roads for free. We chould charge for all driving, all parking, all use of the public roads.

Why do we tax people so that other people get free road use, free on street parking, and free use for bikes?

Yes government exists to mush all these social costs together but we need funding, we want to stop subsidizing cars, and you can't argue for pricing roads for cars unless you say, okey dokey, let's price them for bikes too.

Of course it would be a much smaller price. :)

Posted by Fairisfair | June 19, 2007 5:57 PM
45

Thx for the clarification re: California Stop. I'd always referred to that as a "rolling stop," but guess that's a bit of an oxymoron.

Posted by Justy | June 19, 2007 5:59 PM
46

Since 2.3% bike to work it would seem that 97.7% don't and therefore the bulk of street work is paid by non bikers. Car drivers pay something like $32 million in parking fees, parking fines and traffic ticket in addition to all the taxes everyone pays.

Road damage is done primarily by buses, trucks, and weather. Oh and those ridiculous studded tires.

The law says bicycles are to drive as far to the right as is safe but that determination is left to the police and judges not the rider. BTW the law does not allow passing on the right unless there is a bike lane. Just today I watched an aggressive biker scream at a driver for taking a right w/o signaling on a confusing section of Westlake and then proceed to pass me on the right and then jump out and block the lane then jump onto a sidewalk and back onto the street after running the light in the crosswalk but he did have a light both forward and back which put him into the top 2%.

Last week while walking not one bike stopped at a crosswalk while maybe one out of three cars did - the drivers clearly are much more of a concern but the bikers definitely indicated they were superior to peds.

As for this bikes can do what they want cause they can't hurt people - BS - a friend was run down at a bus stop breaking an arm and a ribs - the biker rode off leaving the scene and my friend injured on the sidewalk.

When I bike I've had little or no problems with drivers - yes occasionally some dodo driver doesn't have a clue but then I do try to stay out of the way and probably think more like a driver. I also break plenty of laws when biking cause I don't want to be the only idiot biker that actually stops at red lights and full stops at signs.

Posted by whatever | June 19, 2007 6:25 PM
47

Ecce homo is either the best troll I've ever encountered or the dumbest asshole this side of the Cascades. I just can't figure it out. He's awesome though.

Posted by Jay | June 19, 2007 6:29 PM
48

@44, you don't really "get" pollution, traffic, or road wear, do you?

Posted by dirge | June 19, 2007 6:30 PM
49
As for this bikes can do what they want cause they can't hurt people - BS - a friend was run down at a bus stop breaking an arm and a ribs - the biker rode off leaving the scene and my friend injured on the sidewalk.

You know what? Shut the fuck up.

Drivers kill about 5,000 American pedestrians a year. How many pedestrians do cyclists kill? Or, more relevantly, drivers kill about 1,000 cyclists and injure about 75,000 every year. How many drivers are killed or injured by cyclists?

Posted by Judah | June 19, 2007 6:57 PM
50

To all you f'n car drivers, you don't pay enough taxes to justify the cost of a 20+ mile long personal driveway for your 2 ton toxic fume spewing petroleum burning death machine to use twice a day.

Get a bike and maybe you will realize how out of shape you are from sitting around yelling at the quarterback who just dropped the pass, even though you'd never catch it in a zillion years, and from listing to the talking heads radio show, that fills your brain with stupidity about how the left wants to take away your right to ruin the earth in the wink of time you are sentient on this planet, while you drive to work for some corporation, who, if it were to vanish from the face of the earth, no one would care about anyway.

Here is to all the bicyclist!!! Great job! Keep up the good work! If everybody would ride a bike, we'd all be better off. But, I don't expect it to happen anytime if my lifetime.

Posted by tarminian | June 19, 2007 7:13 PM
51

Ecce Homo,
Sure, you spend half your day commuting to and from your job at Cogswell's Cogs or wherever. Sure, you spend way too much of your paycheck on gas. Yes, your ass is getting fatter. And yes, it's getting less and less satisfying showing those smug environmentalists where to stick it by exercising your right to drive the biggest stupidest goddamn car you want, thank you very much. I know it's disappointing spending so much on the status vehicle you always wanted, only to find yourself envying the more expensive models. Yes, your life sucks.

Nevertheless, lighten up.

Posted by Sean | June 19, 2007 8:26 PM
52

Let me get this straight Judah - because 700 bicyclists die in accidents my friend, a bus rider and biker, should praise the biker that ran him over?

Posted by whatever | June 19, 2007 8:39 PM
53

I ride my bike to work pretty much every day all year round. The main thing I notice is that most people mostly don't do stupid things. Some people do stupid things by mistake, and some people on bikes and in cars are complete morons.

And while its true there are lots of physical benefits to riding a bike, the best thing about riding a bike is that I absolutely stink by the time I arrive at work. I can relax in my office, get stuff done, while those morons are repelled by my special stench.

Posted by seaweed | June 19, 2007 10:06 PM
54

What is "ecce homo" translated to english? Bicyclists scare me. I never know what they are going to do when they are confronted with traffic signals or signs. Cyclists need to know that they have to follow the same laws that motorized vehicle operators have to follow when driving on public roads.

Posted by lawrence clark | June 19, 2007 11:18 PM
55

Yes whatever, that's exactly what I said. Except not.

Allow me to walk you through the argument:

Someone somewhere says that cyclists breaking traffic laws isn't the same thing as drivers breaking traffic laws because cyclists aren't likely to hurt anyone.

You say, "Well a cyclist hurt my friend at a bus stop!"

I say, in effect, "Shut the fuck up. That has nothing to do with the argument because it's an isolated incident that completely fails to address the realities of what happens when automobiles interact with any other kind of traffic. (insert traffic fatality stats here)."

And you go all strawman (as usual) and ascribe the least plausible interpretation to my argument.

I mean, basically you've got a bunch of bullshit arguments to establish parity between cars and cycles. And not only are they bullshit but they're obviously bullshit. That's my point. Your friend with the ribs? Doesn't mean shit. Sorry.

Posted by Judah | June 19, 2007 11:40 PM
56

Tarmanian,

When you grow up and get a real job, a real house, a family, and a real mode of transportation, we can talk.

Until then, you are just another adolescent ankle-biter who thinks the world revolves around your "evolved" sensibilities.

To quote the Big Lebowski: "The bums lost, condolences".

Posted by ecce homo | June 20, 2007 12:38 AM
57

Sean,

My life is just fine, thanks. Unlike you, I have something to show for my hard work, unlike your bitter, jealous cosmopolitan marxist wannabe yuppie disposition.

Now go pet your pocket dog with his 200 dollar gore-tex booties.

Posted by ecce homo | June 20, 2007 12:41 AM
58

Behold the idiot,

1. real job -- check
2. house -- check
3. transportation -- bike or bus, check

My evolved sensibility comes from observing people like you and the selfish attitudes that you perpetuate with every breath you take.

Posted by tarminian | June 20, 2007 3:51 AM
59

@54 "Behold the man."

I don't understand this "people who use blah must pay taxes for it." I pay taxes that support all kinds of city infrastructure and social programs I don't use. I don't get social assistance. I don't attend elementary or high school. I don't live in a nursing home. Why should any of those programs get my money? Because we're a civilized society that recognizes collective resources achieve more than people screaming about ensuring that their money goes to their personal special interests. You don't like paying for roads that other people get to use? Fine. Move out of the city. Go live in a cave, build your own dirt path out of it, and drive all over it as much as you like.

Posted by Gloria | June 20, 2007 5:16 AM
60

Judah are you saying that because cars cause more damage and death bike riders should be free to ignore laws and endanger people? Because all I said was that the argument that bikes need not obey the law because they don't weigh enough to be dangerous is BS.

"Each weekend upto 10,000 cyclists ride along beach road in Melbourne. One particular group called the Hell ride attracts crazy road racers riding at upto 60km/hr - running red lights. One rider in the group ran a red light and hit an old man crossing the road. The cyclist was unhurt and the man died."

Posted by whatever | June 20, 2007 7:25 AM
61

My two cents....me and my lady friend just bought bikes and had our initial ride last night. I have a new appreciation for bike riders; it got a little hairy dealing with the autos. This is definitely not a bike friendly city. And #50...really? Way to be a self righteous douche bag. You sure do love yourself. Some bikers are assholes, some drivers are assholes. No one group is superior or more well mannered than the other. Get over yourself.

Hazaa!

Posted by Rotten666 | June 20, 2007 7:28 AM
62

Bikes smikes.....what about those damn scooter riders? If you aren't an SUV, get off the road!

Posted by wah | June 20, 2007 7:58 AM
63

whatever... you have truly mastered the art of the strawman. or strawmen, as the case may be. impressive!

Posted by infrquent | June 20, 2007 9:17 AM
64

Thank you, Infrequent

And you have mastered the art of totally missing the point. Should bike riders be allowed to flaunt the law because bikes don't weigh much? I say no they should not be allowed to do whatever they want and have given a couple examples of damage they can do.

Nothing straw about the dead guy in Melbourne or my injured friend in Seattle.


Posted by whatever | June 20, 2007 10:30 AM
65

@whatever: i did not miss your point.

in a debate, anecdotal evidence is mostly useless. in most cases it proves nothing (even if it is true -- which is usually unverifiable which among other things means it cannot be refuted). it can be useful to ascertain if a specific event occurred or not (or to verify that a case can exist), and that's about it.

you gave an example of ONE death from a crazy bicycle demonstration (not even a commute) compared to the thousands of ped deaths from autos, and think bicyclists are the problem? you make/enforce laws when there is a problem. cyclists killing peds is not a problem.

but i will say here are the specific stawman arguments you used in your last post:

1. that there are no deaths or accidents between a cyclist and a ped.

2. cyclists should be able to do whatever they want.

3. (implied) bike riders should be able to do whatever they want.

4. (implied) bike riders should be free to ignore laws

5. "all I said was that the argument that bikes need not obey the law because they don't weigh enough to be dangerous is BS" when no one ever said specifically they don't weigh under to be dangerous. the argument, "they don't weight enough to be dangerous" is another of your strawmen. not to mention that you certainly said more than that.

that's a whole lotta stawmen and not much actual debate...

the way you frame it is as though someone is saying this: legally, bicyclists should be able to throw bottles at drivers and peds while riding drunk the wrong way in the middle of a one way freeway for the sole reason that bikes are made from material so light it would be impossible to ever in the history of the world to ever hurt another individual. no one said that.

this from someone who cites drivers paying more on traffic tickets than bicyclists as a reason bicyclists shouldn't be on the road. your posts give me headaches and i'm done responding to them.

@everyone else: sorry for the long post. iím done responding.

Posted by infrequent | June 20, 2007 12:01 PM
66

I want to learn to carry and use a bow and arrow while biking.

Posted by Xilip | June 20, 2007 12:05 PM
67

2. should have been: cyclists should be able to do whatever they want soley because they weigh less.

Posted by infrequent | June 20, 2007 12:06 PM
68

#42 said - "The difference when a biker breaks the law is that they're not driving 4000 lbs of metal. They may endanger themselves or mildly endanger pedestrians but they're not rising lives by any means."

So as you see the one report cited does refute the above argument. Never did I say cars aren't a greater danger nor did I say bikes shouldn't be allowed to use the roads. Didn't say anyone said or implied they could do anything they want but said they should not be allowed to break the law just because they are on bikes.

As for who pays for roads, it was a reponse to someone that said "You don't pay shit for city roads compared to the bicyclists who use them. Seattle roads are funded through property taxes and sales taxes. " and pointed out that since the vast majority don't use the roads for biking that in fact car owners pay the bulk of the taxes for roads and in addition pay the general fund through parking fees and fines as well as tickets.

Posted by whatever | June 20, 2007 12:21 PM
69

yegvpf mfwqsz kcyai tnhedm pdavyg zmapnr qurw

Posted by spogtvu rxanugl | June 25, 2007 6:11 PM
70

yegvpf mfwqsz kcyai tnhedm pdavyg zmapnr qurw

Posted by spogtvu rxanugl | June 25, 2007 6:16 PM
71

Las Vegas
[url=http://condosforrent-las-newyears-vegas.gebook.org/] condosforrent las newyears vegas [/url]

Posted by rewq4545 | July 1, 2007 12:57 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).