Blind_Io;n3545920 said:But accountability does, hence number plates and insurance.
narf;n3545921 said:Prizrak' claim was that cars don't attack bicycles.
narf;n3545919 said:This one must have had a numberplate on the bicycle, how else would the police have made the arrest for public drinking? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confli...Bridgeport.jpg
WTF is public drinking anyway? Something drivers of cars never do, I guess.
Also this, same page:
People gonna people mode of transportation doesn't appear to matter much.
Wow, a whopping estimated 15 instances within 20 years while there are thousands of peaceful Critical Masses every year - I won't deny aggression at Critical Mass events (sometimes originating from car drivers, sometimes from cyclists), that would be ridiculous, but that only proves that only an extremely tiny fraction of Critical Masses contain conflicts. That is normal when there are people interacting with each other, it's not unusual, given the instances of road rage exclusively between car drivers.prizrak;n3545917 said:
By that logic it would be OK to ram a car off the road which is parked so it disrupts traffic and causes a massive traffic jam. In cities with tram tracks on the streets you sometimes see trams stopped because there is a car parked and they can't pass it, causing a traffic jam for cars. Is it OK to ram that car or the tram from the road because they disrupt traffic?prizrak;n3545924 said:Yeah all of those were due to cyclists being entitled dicks and disrupting traffic, which didn't seat well with some of the less patient/stable drivers.
As if aggressive drivers are only triggered by Critical Mass...prizrak;n3545924 said:Remove Critical Ass from the equation and suddenly those drivers have no reason to do anything.
narf;n3545919 said:People gonna people mode of transportation doesn't appear to matter much.
Eye-Q;n3545928 said:Wow, a whopping estimated 15 instances within 20 years while there are thousands of peaceful Critical Masses every year
- I won't deny aggression at Critical Mass events (sometimes originating from car drivers, sometimes from cyclists), that would be ridiculous, but that only proves that only an extremely tiny fraction of Critical Masses contain conflicts. That is normal when there are people interacting with each other
By that logic it would be OK to ram a car off the road which is parked so it disrupts traffic and causes a massive traffic jam. In cities with tram tracks on the streets you sometimes see trams stopped because there is a car parked and they can't pass it, causing a traffic jam for cars. Is it OK to ram that car or the tram from the road because they disrupt traffic?
IMHO it's not about accountability, but about education and de-escalation from all sides. You are always about "x against y" - when there are more cyclists on their own, ideally separated part of public place, there is more space for cars. Yes, I realize that if you give cyclists more space it has to come from somewhere, often from roads which were used by cars before, but you need much less space for a cyclist than for a car so if 20% of people decide to cycle there are 20% less cars on the road which in turn frees up the remaining road for other car drivers. Of course there has to be a mutual understanding and respect for each other, that includes cyclists as well as car drivers, otherwise nothing really works. The majority of cyclists and the majority of car drivers do respect each other.
I know there are different highway codes in different countries (and states in the US for that matter), but I guess in all highway codes one of the first paragraphs, if not the first one is something like "The participation in traffic requires permanent caution and mutual respect".
Out of millions of car meets and auto club rides there have been 0 similar incidents.Eye-Q;n3545928 said:Wow, a whopping estimated 15 instances within 20 years while there are thousands of peaceful Critical Masses every year - I won't deny aggression at Critical Mass events (sometimes originating from car drivers, sometimes from cyclists), that would be ridiculous, but that only proves that only an extremely tiny fraction of Critical Masses contain conflicts. That is normal when there are people interacting with each other, it's not unusual, given the instances of road rage exclusively between car drivers.
Yes it is, any other questions?By that logic it would be OK to ram a car off the road which is parked so it disrupts traffic and causes a massive traffic jam. In cities with tram tracks on the streets you sometimes see trams stopped because there is a car parked and they can't pass it, causing a traffic jam for cars. Is it OK to ram that car or the tram from the road because they disrupt traffic?
You can't sit on two chairs with one ass, either bicycles are just another private vehicle and therefore subject to same laws and regulations OR it is special and therefore should not be given same level of protection as others. Choose one. Also neither you nor narf have been able to provide any reason as to why a bicycle should be exempt from basic registration, insurance and inspection beyond the "well it has no motor/engine", which is a non-reason.IMHO it's not about accountability, but about education and de-escalation from all sides. You are always about "x against y" - when there are more cyclists on their own, ideally separated part of public place, there is more space for cars. Yes, I realize that if you give cyclists more space it has to come from somewhere, often from roads which were used by cars before, but you need much less space for a cyclist than for a car so if 20% of people decide to cycle there are 20% less cars on the road which in turn frees up the remaining road for other car drivers. Of course there has to be a mutual understanding and respect for each other, that includes cyclists as well as car drivers, otherwise nothing really works. The majority of cyclists and the majority of car drivers do respect each other.
By that logic when me and 20 of my friends are out driving we should be treated as one vehicle and run red lights, stops, etc...group of cyclists - regardless if it's Critical Mass, a group of friends or a company outing - that large group has to stick to the highway code (which includes the right to be treated as one vehicle, at least here in Germany, otherwise the group would get fragmented and disrupt other traffic even more), exactly as other ttraffic participants have to stick to the highway code.
This man gets it, there is literally 0 point in your movement, it does nothing to make cycling mainstream because it already is, even 10 years ago seeing a bicycle on the street was uncommon now they are everywhere, there are bike lanes, everywhere, there are even special segregated ones with traffic lights just for them in some places. But shit don't take my word for it, here is an SF chronicle article from 2015 https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea...is-dying-of-self-inflicted-wounds-6481511.phpSirEdward said:Plus, if you want to de-escalate, then Critical Mass has to go, because Critical Mass is a forceful reduction of other people's freedom for no other reason than getting attention, so it is the exact opposite than de-escalating.
“There was a time when SF needed Critical Mass,” one wrote. “That time has run its course about a decade ago.”
“The Bike party seeks to bring the community together,” another wrote. “Critical Mass strives to keep it divided; we will never advance cyclist rights while these two exist in the same city.”
Bikes are mainstream. Just check out Market Street during commute hours. But now they’re transportation, not a political statement.
SirEdward;n3545932 said:Exactly. This is why bicycles should have licence plate and insurance.
narf;n3546099 said:Don't forget pedestrians. They're people too.
narf;n3546099 said:Don't forget pedestrians. They're people too.
prizrak;n3545943 said:By that logic when me and 20 of my friends are out driving we should be treated as one vehicle and run red lights, stops, etc...
Blind_Io;n3546105 said:So vehicles are people now? I know I've named my Xterra and both my bikes, but this is a little much.
narf;n3546110 said:The same rule that allows bicycles to form a Verband allows cars, pedestrians, horseback riders, funeral processions, etc. to do the same.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy..._Convoy_Rights has a tiny description.
Relevant part is bolded.wikipedia said:The Highway Code of several European countries (Norway, Italy, Greece, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, possibly more) includes special rights for marked convoys
Do CM rides have clear and uniform markings? Do they obtain special permission? Or perhaps they are being used for emergency and/or catastrophe intervention? Curious about that last one, how do they manage to schedule those on specific day?Clear and uniform marking has been required in court decisions for these rights to apply. Operating such convoy usually needs special permission, but there are exemptions for emergency and catastrophe intervention.
Using a vehicle is not a right, using your own body for traveling is. Not a complicated distinction.narf;n3546111 said:If people are gonna people behind the wheel or handlebar, what's stopping people from people-ing without something to hold on to?
prizrak;n3546112 said:For a pedant you are bad at reading once again, from your own link:
Relevant part is bolded.
And
Do CM rides have clear and uniform markings? Do they obtain special permission? Or perhaps they are being used for emergency and/or catastrophe intervention? Curious about that last one, how do they manage to schedule those on specific day?
Using a vehicle is not a right, using your own body for traveling is. Not a complicated distinction.
Eye-Q;n3545444 said:That said, demanding licensing, registering and insuring bicycles because of those incidents won't prevent those incidents since assholes stay assholes.
narf;n3545447 said:Happens with pedestrians, let's require a license for that.
narf;n3545919 said:People gonna people mode of transportation doesn't appear to matter much.
Just so we can be sure that you two are intellectually honest and not biased, the same logic should apply to guns, right?Eye-Q;n3545928 said:Wow, a whopping estimated 15 instances within 20 years while there are thousands of peaceful Critical Masses every year ... That is normal when there are people interacting with each other, it's not unusual...
narf;n3546099 said:Don't forget pedestrians. They're people too.
I'm reading the link you sent me homie, my German is as good as my Mandarin, whic is to say shitty.narf;n3546119 said:English Wikipedia appears to only focus on motor vehicle convoys. Read up for precision: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/__27.html and https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/__29.html
TL;DR §27: Motor vehicle convoys need to be uniformly marked.
TL;DR §29: Motor vehicle convoys are always classified as "excess road use", which needs permission.
If you are not interested in a real discussion why do you bother showing up? By your own logic all people need to be locked 24/7 in small rooms to stop them from peopling, you included.So people are only gonna people if they're using a vehicle? :?
prizrak;n3546125 said:I'm reading the link you sent me homie, my German is as good as my Mandarin, whic is to say shitty.
Also you are undermining your own argument, since the convoy rules only apply to motor vehicles, which is to say not bicycles as, per your own argument, they do not fit the definition.
narf;n3546136 said:As I've written, motor vehicle convoys need to be uniformly marked and always get permissions - as a corollary, other convoys (bicycles, pedestrians, horses, etc.) don't need to be uniformly marked or always get permissions.