[SDCBC] Fwd: Re: [critical-mass] critical-mass Digest, Vol 37, Issue 6

Wed Oct 17 16:44:44 EDT 2007

FYI

>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:36:55 -0700
>From: "Mike X Macrae" <nubinski at gmail.com>
>To: critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu
>Subject: Re: [critical-mass] critical-mass Digest, Vol 37, Issue 6
>
>Hello all -
>
>I just got off the phone with the same officer that I had a 
>discussion with prior to last month's CM ride. We talked a little 
>about the Sept. ride as well as some general CM issues. He is 
>interested in trying to have a round table style discussion with 
>about 4-5 people from each side of the issue, if possible before 
>this month's Critical Mass ride. In addition to him, he is trying to 
>have several different police officers and/or captains there, from a 
>variety of different beats to help us understand how different parts 
>of the SDPD see and deal with our rides. From us he asked that I 
>find a small number of people that would be willing to have a dialog 
>with the officers. He proposed that we each bring about 10 questions 
>to the table and bounce them back and forth. I agree with him that a 
>smaller number of people is likely going to be more productive in 
>terms of communicating, but I also want to make sure that everyone 
>with a good voice and intelligent words can be there.
>
>Given that CM is the time when I usually see most of my cycling 
>companions and they want to do this before the ride (which I also 
>think is a good idea) I need to get the word out. Please let me know 
>if you are interested in attending this and/or possible questions to 
>take to the table.
>
>Feel free to forward this, blog, post etc.
>
>Thanks,
>-MXM
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 02:34:08 -0700
>From: DOREN GARCIA <<mailto:doren42 at sbcglobal.net>doren42 at sbcglobal.net >
>Subject: Re: [critical-mass] critical-mass Digest, Vol 37, Issue 5
>To: <<mailto:critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu>critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu>
>Message-ID: <<mailto:C33B2520.2CE5C%doren42 at sbcglobal.net> 
>C33B2520.2CE5C%doren42 at sbcglobal.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>Chuck,
>
> > I sure hope you're not talking about me when you mention "aggressive
> > assholes"...
>
>I think the arrests were unwarrented. That's probably why you were not
>charged.
>
>I've never seen a cop arrest anyone for a traffic violation & I saw both
>arrests.
>
>I only vaguely remember the siren.
>
> >> On 10/16/07, DOREN GARCIA < 
> <mailto:doren42 at sbcglobal.net>doren42 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> The confrontation with the police was due to misunderstanding on
> >> both sides:
> >> The police looked at the refusal of a few to obey as a potential riot.
> >> The cyclists thought their infractions were trivial.
>
>Really what I think happened was misunderstanding.
>
>At the Tower, the police guy was so nervous trying to get us off University
>he didn't realize there was no place to go. It was wall to wall bikes and
>since he was out in the street he couldn't see the side street was FULL.
>
>Later there were a few who were mildly breaking the law but I think we have
>to remember it there were 375 of us and only a few of them. They got nervous
>and decided to nip what ever fears they had in the bud by making an example
>out of someone.
>
>Hey I'm not for perfect adherence. I run stop signs regularly doing all of
>5mph. I'm a militant bike rider much of the time and I don't take shit.
>
>But I'd hate to see a cop run over and kill or mutilate someone, because I
>like my bike mates, hate to see a family in sorrow and the cop would have to
>bear the guilt for the rest of his life.
>
>Corking - I'm for it. If the definition is letting the entire mass get
>through a light red or green. I see the mass like a semi truck. Once we are
>in the lane the light may turn but we are a single vehicle.
>
>Doughnuting? - or what ever its called - circling in an intersection in a
>deliberate attempt to snarl traffic - I'm against it. I know, my bike
>friends get in a tizzy when I say I'm not for it. But I think its counter
>productive. I'm pissed off too but I'm not going to take it out on
>innocents.
>
>I hope we can come to a critical anarchic collective decision about the
>efficacy of the tactic. We need to at least discuss it. Pass around the
>discussion.
>
>There is a difference between standing up for our side of the story and
>deliberately screwing traffic. Again, most motorists are on our side and I'd
>like to keep it that way, and get more to see things our way.
>
>Classical DJ Doren
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:09:56 -0700
>From: Bicyclist <<mailto:bikes.alot at cox.net>bikes.alot at cox.net >
>Subject: [critical-mass] legislation? Re:  AUGUST POLICE CONFRONTATION
>To: "Austin a" <<mailto:austin at surfshot.com>austin at surfshot.com>
>Cc: <mailto:critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu>critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu
>
>
>Austin:
>I'm wondering (really) which laws/"legislation" you'd consider "that
>says otherwise" than that, "... cyclists are entitled to everything
>that cars are..." (entitled to). We (local and State bicycling
>advocacy organizations) sometimes have some slight opportunities to
>get legislation done to change laws, so I'm interested.
>
>I can think of a couple - see copies further below...
>The CVC21202 about riding as far right as practicable is pretty
>onerous except with the exceptions (that most police and motorists
>seem unaware of) already listed in this law, it comes down to being
>similar to the laws for slow vehicle operation.
>The Bike Lane rules are certainly onerous, but soooo many bicyclists
>seem to want more bike lanes, it's kind of a double-bind.
>
>It really seems to me that it's the car-culture attitude of most
>motorists - roads are for cars only, car driving is more important
>than bicycling, etc. - than the laws. Seems like the actual laws
>could be said to protect our rights to roadway use... CVC 21200 same
>rights and responsibilities, for example.
>
>I agree that it's about "communing with existing traffic, not waging
>war there against" but the existing behavior of some of people
>(bicyclists and motorists) too often screws up the mix - motorists
>bullying by bulk and speed and inattention, and of course scofflaw
>bicyclists unaware/disrespectful of their responsibilities toward
>other road users. I hope CM events can show off/highlight that "roads
>are for people, not just for people in cars."
>
>Jim (a bicyclist)
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Rights and responsibilities...
>21200.  (a) Every person riding a bicycle upon a highway has all the
>rights and is subject to all the provisions applicable to the driver
>of a vehicle by this division, including, but not limited to,
>provisions concerning driving under the influence of alcoholic
>beverages or drugs, and by Division 10 (commencing with Section
>20000), Section 27400, Division 16.7 (commencing with Section 39000),
>Division 17 (commencing with Section 40000.1), and Division 18
>(commencing with Section 42000), except those provisions which by
>their very nature can have no application.
>
>Where to ride on the roadway...
>21202.  (a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed
>less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at
>that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb
>or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
>(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding
>in the same direction.
>(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a
>private road or driveway.
>(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not
>limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians,
>animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it
>unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the
>provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a
>"substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle
>and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
>(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
>(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which
>highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more
>marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of
>that roadway as practicable.
>
>Bike Lanes...
>21208.  (a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been established on a roadway
>pursuant to Section 21207, any person operating a bicycle upon the
>roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in
>the same direction at that time shall ride within the bicycle lane,
>except that the person may move out of the lane under any of the
>following situations:
>(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle, vehicle, or
>pedestrian within the lane or about to enter the lane if the
>overtaking and passing cannot be done safely within the lane.
>(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a
>private road or driveway.
>(3) When reasonably necessary to leave the bicycle lane to avoid
>debris or other hazardous conditions.
>(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
>(b) No person operating a bicycle shall leave a bicycle lane until
>the movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after
>giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in Chapter 6
>(commencing with Section 22100) in the event that any vehicle may be
>affected by the movement.
><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
>At 04:57 PM 10/16/2007, Austin a wrote:
> >Dear Doren (and everyone else too!),
> >
> >I must say I agree with you entirely. There is a line that has been
> >drawn as far as critical mass is concerned betwixt the aggressive
> >and the reasonable. The two categories are described thus,
> >
> >The aggressive:
> >"Cyclists ought to be entitled to everything that cars are despite
> >legislation that says otherwise. I think this is wrong and am going
> >to demonstrate my opinion by breaking the law and obstructing
> >traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian, in an attempt to draw
> >attention to this purported injustice."
> >
> >The reasonable:
> >"Cyclists ought to be entitled to everything that cars are despite
> >legislation that says otherwise. I think this is wrong and am going
> >to demonstrate my opinion by bringing attention to the large
> >contingency of cyclists that exist in our community in such a way
> >that breaks no existing law. I feel, that after the aforementioned
> >attention has been garnered, we may proceed to bolster cyclist
> >advocacy and cyclist friendly legislation in the proper way, i.e.
> >through the civic and judicial structures the city/state has in
> >place. It is in this way that we will not alienate ourselves via the
> >misconduct of The Aggressive and better serve the cycling community."
> >
> >This is all a very garrulous way of saying, don't be an idiot and
> >bang on cars, ride into oncoming traffic and fling obscenities in
> >the general direction of the law.
> >
> >Critical mass is about communing with existing traffic, not waging
> >war there against.
> >
> >Austin.
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: 
><http://libertad.ucsd.edu/pipermail/critical-mass/attachments/20071017/42658168/attachment.html>http://libertad.ucsd.edu/pipermail/critical-mass/attachments/20071017/42658168/attachment.html
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>critical-mass mailing list
><mailto:critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu>critical-mass at libertad.ucsd.edu
>https://libertad.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-mass
>
>End of critical-mass Digest, Vol 37, Issue 6
>********************************************
>
>-------------------
>Michael X Macrae
>6117 Pacific Hall
>Department of Chemistry
>University of California San Diego
><http://www.nubinski.com>www.nubinski.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20071017/99feef82/attachment-0001.html