[BTinSF]

I'll admit it: I have thought "Critical Mass" was an unnecessarily confrontational event since it began. Maybe that's because I don't think any one group of street users have the right to take over and drive the others out--even one evening a month. Cars don't have the right to push cyclists aside but niether do cyclists. Still, this is a new low for San Francisco's "me" rights crowd. In my opinion, it reveals them for selfish, inconsiderate boobs they are. Should we keep tolerating mob rule?

These are not regular folks who just want to ride their bikes to save money on owning a car or gas and get some exercise. These are organized fanatics bent on getting their own way at the expense of everyone else. San Francisco has lots of organized fanatics. Some of them oppose highrises. These demand the streets of the city and, on weekends, its parks all for themselves.

OK, bicycle apologists: Your turn.

Minivan's rude introduction to Critical Smash
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Wednesday, April 4, 2007

It was supposed to be a birthday night out for the kids in San Francisco, but instead turned into a Critical Mass horror show -- complete with a pummeled car, a smashed rear window and little children screaming in terror.

The spontaneous Critical Mass bike rides, in which thousands of free-spirited cyclists roam the city, have been a fixture on the last Friday night of the month since the early 1990s. But even bike-weary cops, who have seen their share of traffic disturbances and minor skirmishes, weren't prepared for what happened during the latest exercise of pedal power.

Here's the story:

Susan Ferrando, her husband, their two children and three preteens had come to San Francisco from Redwood City to celebrate the birthday of Ferrando's 11-year-old daughter. They went to Japantown, where they enjoyed shopping and taking in the blooming cherry blossoms.

Things took a turn for the worse at about 9 p.m., when the family was leaving Japantown -- just as the party of about 3,000 bikers was winding down its monthly red-lights-be-damned ride through the city.

Suddenly, Ferrando said, her car was surrounded by hundreds of cyclists.

Not being from San Francisco, Ferrando thought she might have inadvertently crossed paths with a bicycle race and couldn't figure out why the police, who she had just passed, hadn't warned her.

Confusion, however, quickly turned to terror, she said, when the swarming cyclists began wildly circling around and then running into the sides of her Toyota van.

Filled with panic, Ferrando said, she started inching forward until coming to a stop at Post and Gough streets, where she was surrounded by bikers on all sides.

A biker in front blocked her as another biker began pounding on the windshield. Another was pounding on her window. Another pounded the other side.

"It seemed like they were using their bikes as weapons,'' Ferrando said. One of the bikers then threw his bike -- shattering the rear window and terrifying the young girls inside.

All the while, Ferrando was screaming, "There are children in this car! There are children in this car!"

She had the presence of mind to dial 911 on her cell phone -- and within minutes, the squad of motorcycle cops who were assigned to keep an eye on the ride descended on the scene.

The cyclists were loudly demanding that Ferrando be arrested for hit and run.

According to police, Ferrando had allegedly tapped one of the cyclists' tires.

When the alleged bicycle victim was approached, however, he said he wasn't hurt. He also refused to give his name or any other information.

Then, after a few swear words, the alleged victim took off on his bike while the rest of the crowd continued to yell at both the cops and the van.

Sgt. Ed Callejas -- the lead cop on the scene and a veteran of Critical Mass rides since their inception -- said he'd never seen anything like it before.

"I've seen the bikes swarm cars, and scratch them as they go by. I've seen guys get out of their cars and start fighting with the bikers, but if you had seen the faces on those little girls in tears,'' Callejas said. "All I could do was apologize for what they had been through."

The sergeant suggested that Ferrando write a letter to the mayor.

Estimated damage to the car: $5,300.

For Callejas and other cops assigned to the bike ride, Critical Mass has long been a study in contradictions.

For starters, San Francisco is a "green" city, and bike riding is about as green as you can get -- yet residents and commuters complain endlessly about getting trapped in the rides.

The city tries to ignore the unplanned rides, but there are always cops on hand to monitor the gatherings, even though any kind of traffic planning is impossible because no route is announced.

And even though the rides are held every month, Critical Mass has no organized leadership -- so no one can be held accountable for the group's actions.

In 1997, then-Mayor Willie Brown tried to control the rides. The result was anarchy and mass arrests.

Since then, the rides have shrunk in size. The city's generally hands-off attitude leaves cops as little more than bystanders.

"We sit there and they just go right through the red lights,'' Sgt. Callejas said. "What else can we do? Arrest one rider while 500 keep going?

"The only way to control this is through a massive effort by police and the Sheriff's Department,'' he said.

As for reaction from City Hall, Mayor Gavin Newsom said such acts of violence -- if true -- "only serve to undermine the worthwhile message of Critical Mass, which is to raise the awareness of bike transportation issues."

The mayor also said that -- if the charges are grounded -- he expected the attackers to be "punished to the greatest extent of the law."

Riiight.

Source: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/04/04/BAGF7P12RN23.DTL&type=printable

[Frisco_Zig]

totally ridiculous. Though I support more bike lanes and saftey for bikers I dispise these assholes

[rs913]

San Francisco has lots of organized fanatics. Some of them oppose highrises. These demand the streets of the city and, on weekends, its parks all for themselves.

That leads to a greater question...is SF just different from other major cities in terms of how it lets these fanatics get away with doing their thing? Time and time again, the city has proven sympathetic to the belief that "your right to be an ass supersedes others' rights not to be subject to your assiness" I wouldn't be surprised if some of the fanatics have migrated here knowing it's friendly territory.

As for Critical Mass, I know many of this city's bicyclists hate it, because it's actually damaged their efforts to make this city bike-friendly.

[BTinSF]

^^^rs913, I know you are correct that even bicyclists see the counterproductive nature of Critical Mass (anyone can just just look at the comments on SFGate if they don't believe it), but SF's leaders, including the mayor, seem to continue to act as if the spokespeople for the most radical elements in groups like cyclists actually speak for most of the group.

Does anybody think the SFPD is even capable of stopping Critical Mass? I have my doubts. I suspect if they do try, they will be accused by a wide range of people and politicians in SF of "brutality", the Police Commission will be on their *ss and the leaders of Critical Mass will just laugh at them. When it comes to things like this, SF is a city out of control.

[Frisco_Zig]

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the fanatics have migrated here knowing it's friendly territory.

You wouldn't be surprised and I am certian of it. It permeates our whole planning process as well where ever idea gets watered down until every single voice has been heard and consensus has been reached.

[Frisco_Zig]

Does anybody think the SFPD is even capable of stopping Critical Mass? I have my doubts. I suspect if they do try, they will be accused by a wide range of people and politicians in SF of "brutality", the Police Commission will be on their *ss and the leaders of Critical Mass will just laugh at them. When it comes to things like this, SF is a city out of control.


really isn't this the storyfor everything in SF from the people smoking crack on 16th and Mission, the the gutter punks on Haight ST to the violence and property crimes?

We are tolerent so they don't care. Seems natural

[rs913]

When it comes to things like this, SF is a city out of control.

It permeates our whole planning process as well where ever idea gets watered down until every single voice has been heard and consensus has been reached.

That makes me wonder if this trend can be reversed. It just seems ridiculous that SF has become a city in which cracking down on something like Critical Ass is Not Okay. Obviously it didn't happen overnight or because of a single event or decision...it's an issue of norms and expectations building up over the years.

What's it going to take? (Not a rhetorical question, I'm actually wondering). A renegade mayor who's tied to nobody and doesn't give a damn? A major catastrophe (i.e. "The Big One") that makes everyone rethink their priorities? Or, more likely, for SF's quality of life to gradually decline to the point where everyone realizes the city needs to operate differently?

[Reminiscence]

These radical bicyclist people are insane, in my opinion. I also strongly support more bike lanes and increased security for bikes, but I dont understand how damaging someone's car and frightening the life out of innocent people gets them what they want. I'm sure there are ways to make this problem go away without angering or annoying the other people of the city. Its a good thing to be liberal, but its times like these where I think cities like Berkeley and SF are a little too liberal. :(

[Richard Mlynarik]

These radical bicyclist people are insane, in my opinion. I also strongly support more bike lanes and increased security for bikes, but I dont understand how damaging someone's car and frightening the life out of innocent people gets them what they want. I'm sure there are ways to make this problem go away without angering or annoying the other people of the city. Its a good thing to be liberal, but its times like these where I think cities like Berkeley and SF are a little too liberal. :(

OK. I don't buy the "innocents" line. Not without proof.
Which we're never going to see, absent some videographer being imprisoned or something.
I've been hit by motorists (not while riding in CM, and not even while on a bicycle), who've subsequently sworn up and down that nothing happened.

(Another handy fact to remember: assault with a motor vehicle is always a victimless crime -- and you don't even lose any licence points! -- if you remember the magic words "I didn't see him".)

Having a bunch of "terrified" suburban teenagers in the minivan is no guarantee of reasonability, either: I've heard astonishingly psychotic belligerence from the mouths of soccer moms with kids in tow.

If I had to bet on this -- which I don't and won't -- it would be that a steamed-up suburbodroid male, already indignant that San Francisco doesn't have the freeway access right to the strip mall it is one's right to have -- lost his cool and attempted to force his way into a pack of bicycles, then got all indignant when they didn't bow down before the might of his two tons of metal like they're supposed to.

Matier&Ross are clearly playing this up for whatever they can get,
and we're clearly found a choir to be preached to here.
Continue as you were.

[The_Analyst]

OK. I don't buy the "innocents" line. Not without proof...

If I had to bet on this -- which I don't and won't -- it would be that a steamed-up suburbodroid male, already indignant that San Francisco doesn't have the freeway access right to the strip mall it is one's right to have -- lost his cool and attempted to force his way into a pack of bicycles, then got all indignant when they didn't bow down before the might of his two tons of metal like they're supposed to.

Let's say the driver was at fault and hit someone, even deliberately for some reason. How does this justify other bicyclists beating on the car, smashing the windows, etc.? Unless it is for self-defense, an escalation of violence is never appropriate is it?

[TowerDistrict]

If I had to bet on this -- which I don't and won't -- it would be that a steamed-up suburbodroid male, already indignant that San Francisco doesn't have the freeway access right to the strip mall it is one's right to have -- lost his cool and attempted to force his way into a pack of bicycles, then got all indignant when they didn't bow down before the might of his two tons of metal like they're supposed to.

Matier&Ross are clearly playing this up for whatever they can get, and we're clearly found a choir to be preached to here. Continue as you were.

You're good... you simply assume the exact opposite of what was actually reported, post it as some experienced counter point, and finish it with a conspiracy theory. hahaha... awesome.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

OK. I don't buy the "innocents" line. Not without proof.
Which we're never going to see, absent some videographer being imprisoned or something.

Wait a second: you have to prove your innocence now? In America, you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

According to the story:

According to police, Ferrando had allegedly tapped one of the cyclists' tires.

When the alleged bicycle victim was approached, however, he said he wasn't hurt. He also refused to give his name or any other information.

The evidence we have is that the van and the bike had a minor collision, with no damage alleged.

When an accident happens, both parties are supposed to stop and exchange information as soon as it was safe.

Was it safe for the minivan driver to stop? Did the bicyclist approach the minivan driver with information?

From the limited evidence available, you cannot even assume that the minivan driver was at fault. How do we know the bicyclist didn't collide with the minivan?

Accidents happen all the time. That's why we have something called "due process". Vigilante justice is not how America is supposed to work.

Based on the evidence, the attack on the family was totally unjustified, unless the bicyclists felt like they were in immediate lethal danger.

I am all for sharing the road with bicyclists. They also should be held to the same standards. This includes licensing, which would require passing a test showing that the bicyclist understands the basics of the vehicle code. Basics such as: you must stop at a stop sign, no rolling into the crosswalk, etc.

[Buckeye Native 001]

As for Critical Mass, I know many of this city's bicyclists hate it, because it's actually damaged their efforts to make this city bike-friendly.

Like any eco-terrorist group, makes the general public weary of the rest of us sensibly-minded environmentalists.

[ozone]

As a strong advocate for urban bicycling I have never supported the tatics of groups like Critical Mass. They do more harm than good IMO. Having said that... nearly every day I am cut off or nearly hit by some unconscious suburbanite who 9 out 10 X is yaking on their cell phone. They just don't 'see' us.

Partly it has to do with the machine they are encased in and partly it has to do with the fact that when they get in their cars in the suburbs and drive to the freeway they hardly ever encounter pedestrians or cyclists so they are not condtioned to look out of us. I am surprised how many drivers seem like complete idiots and completely dumbfounded when they encounter bike riders...as if we are aliens.

I blame the local government for not properly educating both the car drivers and the cyclists and for not taking the concerns of the cyclists seriously.

[colemonkee]

Why didn't the police officer arrest at least one of the bikers who was hitting the car? It's a very clear crime with an obvious victim and should be prosecuted. Anyone who hit the car that wasn't directly involved with the accident should've left the scene in handcuffs.

[Reminiscence]

OK. I don't buy the "innocents" line. Not without proof.
Which we're never going to see, absent some videographer being imprisoned or something.
I've been hit by motorists (not while riding in CM, and not even while on a bicycle), who've subsequently sworn up and down that nothing happened.

(Another handy fact to remember: assault with a motor vehicle is always a victimless crime -- and you don't even lose any licence points! -- if you remember the magic words "I didn't see him".)

Having a bunch of "terrified" suburban teenagers in the minivan is no guarantee of reasonability, either: I've heard astonishingly psychotic belligerence from the mouths of soccer moms with kids in tow.

If I had to bet on this -- which I don't and won't -- it would be that a steamed-up suburbodroid male, already indignant that San Francisco doesn't have the freeway access right to the strip mall it is one's right to have -- lost his cool and attempted to force his way into a pack of bicycles, then got all indignant when they didn't bow down before the might of his two tons of metal like they're supposed to.

Matier&Ross are clearly playing this up for whatever they can get,
and we're clearly found a choir to be preached to here.
Continue as you were.

You make some good point, but I was merely going by what the story says. I myself, at just 20 years old, have been in countless near-collisions with cars while walking through the streets to school. Most of these people will be quick to say "yeah, thats just because he doesnt know the traffic laws", while the fact is that I do, I follow them at all times, and still I'm the one responsible in the eyes of people who just simply dont know how to drive. In short, theres an enourmous amount of bad drivers out there, which is why I've always believed I've had a guardian angel protecting me from them. The words "I didnt see him" are about the worst excuse you can use for an accident though. I'd usually say "If you didnt see me, then maybe you should'nt be driving!" Theres loopholes though, so people can get away with it. The article mentions "children" and "pre-teens", which is not really clear what age they really were. However, as The_Analyst was wise to mention, theres no excuse for taking a bike and causing $5300 in damages to the car. I've been really upset with those bad drivers too, even confronted one and got him to admit he was wrong, but I would surely stop short of resorting to violence.

[rs913]

Having said that... nearly every day I am cut off or nearly hit by some unconscious suburbanite who 9 out 10 X is yaking on their cell phone. They just don't 'see' us.

Partly it has to do with the machine they are encased in and partly it has to do with the fact that when they get in their cars in the suburbs and drive to the freeway they hardly ever encounter pedestrians or cyclists so they are not condtioned to look out of us. I am surprised how many drivers seem like complete idiots and completely dumbfounded when they encounter bike riders...as if we are aliens.

You're exactly right about that. I do ride around the Contra Costa County suburbs occasionally, and when people ask me if it's safer than riding in Berkeley/Oakland, I have to qualify my answer. The streets are wider and less trafficked, but you really do have to ride more "defensively".

Another factor - which doesn't excuse this, but explains it - is that driving has become such a chore for most of the population. Many people have lots of responsibilities and too little time, and roads in most metro areas are pretty crowded. As a result, many people adopt an "everyone's the enemy" attitude when they get behind the wheel. Other drivers are the enemy. Other bad drivers are even more the enemy. Bikes are definitely the enemy, especially in areas where drivers aren't used to them. Nobody's happy to see us!

I still don't like Critical Mass any better, though. I'd love to see them try to pull their stunts in Walnut Creek.

[Dogpatch]

I can understand a riders desire not to be flattened by some oblivious douche who has other things to do besides paying attention to the road. But what is Critcal Mass trying to acheive? Is this all they can do?? How is causing traffic jams and beating helpless minivans senseless accomplishing anything? These pricks need to go back to the drawing board, re-evaluate what they're trying to accomplish and come back with something that makes sense.

[POLA]

Forget Critical Mass:

http://midnightridazz.com/

No politics, just a fun and easy way to explore parts of Los Angeles. Trust me, it's the best way to see downtown. No fights with cars, everyone on the street loves it, and all have a great time. So, if your a real urbanite, then you should owne a bike. See you out there.

[BTinSF]

I've been hit by motorists (not while riding in CM, and not even while on a bicycle), who've subsequently sworn up and down that nothing happened.



Just for the record: I've been hit by a bicyclist; on my motor scooter! I stopped at a Stop Sign and, "CRASH!" Into my rear came a woman on a bike. "I didn't know you were going to stop!" she says. Of course she didn't--cyclist rarely do stop. But other users of the street mostly actually obey traffic laws, a foreign concept to many cyclists.

I've had other near misses, by the way--most often from people whizzing down Turk St. the wrong way and nearly creaming me as I come out of my building's parking garage and look to the right--the only direction from which traffic could be legally coming--before pulling out.

Aw yeah. I too support riders who ride legally and considerately. But I don't support the sense of entitlement and the "I'm green so I must be right" attitude that permeates most converstations about this--such as, predictably, from Richard.

[BTinSF]

Why didn't the police officer arrest at least one of the bikers who was hitting the car? It's a very clear crime with an obvious victim and should be prosecuted.

Because it was San Francisco and the Bicycle Coalition has political power and the cops understand what they can and can't do. Among the things they can't do is take sides against anyone with political power. I they did that, there would not be the usual lineup of politicians supporting their next ballot prop for an increase in their pay or pension benefits. The Police Chief, a political appointee, would be on their case. The officer who did the arrest would likely have to explain him- or herself in front of the politically appointed Police Commission. The Bay Guardian would have a hissy fit. :tantrum: :babyeat:

[craeg]

I'm not at all surprised to read who on high horse is defending the critical massholes.
Smug is a f*cking epidemic in this town.
What I am most bothered by is Gavins' response. Seriously WTF.
Inertia in this city is elevated to the level of nirvana.

[ozone]

If a Hummer had hit you instead of a bike do you think you might have a less defensive attitude BTinSF?

Bikes are definitely the enemy, especially in areas where drivers aren't used to them. Nobody's happy to see us!

The fact that "driving has become such a chore" becuase many people think they have lots of responsibilities just shows me that many people cannot manage their lives and their irresponsibilty then becomes everyone else's problem. To those people I say "Change your g'ddamn lifestyle and stop taking your problems out through road rage."

I agree that many people have a "everyone's the enemy" attitude in traffic but I'm really suprised just how many people when I'm riding with them even in light traffic have this attitude that bikes just shouldn't exist, they have no rights and are "in the way." What ever happen to SHARE THE ROAD?

BTW I think some the posters who are most up in arms about this are in danger of coming across as smug and self-intitled just like the cyclists they are so critical of.

[Reminiscence]

Just for the record: I've been hit by a bicyclist; on my motor scooter! I stopped at a Stop Sign and, "CRASH!" Into my rear came a woman on a bike. "I didn't know you were going to stop!" she says. Of course she didn't--cyclist rarely do stop. But other users of the street mostly actually obey traffic laws, a foreign concept to many cyclists.

I've had other near misses, by the way--most often from people whizzing down Turk St. the wrong way and nearly creaming me as I come out of my building's parking garage and look to the right--the only direction from which traffic could be legally coming--before pulling out.

You know, I actually had a very similar incident, except it was bike to bike rather than on a scooter. A while ago I used to think that only motorist violated the laws, but I learned bicyclists and pedestrians do too. Another thing I find particularly irritating, is when bicyclists use sidewalks instead of bike lanes, even when the bike lane is clearly provided next to the sidewalk. I'm usually walking and either I have to move out of the way for them, or risk getting side-swiped by a bike while listening to my walkman.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Heh, I just saw a flyer advertising that Critical Mass is staging a ride from my university to the Santa Ana Farmer's Market next week to promote bike useage awareness.

[dimondpark]

Its not easy to ride a bike or drive in The City. Its clearly the the fault of those who caused the damage but the cops shoulda stopped her from turning onto Geary.

[Richard Mlynarik]

Wait a second: you have to prove your innocence now? In America, you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

According to the story:
Followed by third-hand regurgitatation of the Matier&Ross hit piece!

Based on the evidence, the attack on the family was totally unjustified, unless the bicyclists felt like they were in immediate lethal danger.
Thanks for that absolutely compelling evidence.
I'd never have said a peep if I'd known that such irrefutable, objective, documented, corroborated legally binding third hand evidence of malfeasance were known.
I take it all back.

You you sure showed me how to prove innocence in a court of law. In America!
I am all for sharing the road with bicyclists. They also should be held to the same standards. This includes licensing, which would require passing a test showing that the bicyclist understands the basics of the vehicle code. Basics such as: you must stop at a stop sign, no rolling into the crosswalk, etc.
And there's nothing like a sanctimonious non sequitur to clinch the deal!

I'm sold.

Hey, to save extra time, why don't we just appoint Mssrs M&R state executioners (in America we love capital punishment once vaguely suspected or framed as non-innocent) as well as their existing roles of police, prosecutors, judge and juries while we're at it?

[JAM]

Sorry to hear about this. Bad publicity for the good bikers.

Although not organized, we get the same sort of crap here in Austin on the Town Lake trail. A select few bikers seem to think they own the trail and everyone else be damned. If they would ever take the time out to read the tail rules posted everywhere, it clearly states that ALL trail traffic yield to slower trail traffic.

[PBuchman]

I think the city's "hands-off" approach is probably the best course of action (or inaction, if you prefer). Any sort of crackdown would necessarily create a confrontation between the mob and police, and usually such confrontations lead to violence on an order of magnitude far greater than the incident described in the story (think 1960's protests, fire hoses, police beatings, etc.) As terrible as this incident appears to have been, I fear that it would pale in comparison to the sort of brutality that would necessitate controlling the mob.

Perhaps there is a better solution, but I don't see it.

[BTinSF]

Its not easy to ride a bike or drive in The City. Its clearly the the fault of those who caused the damage but the cops shoulda stopped her from turning onto Geary.

Why? Did Critical Mass have a parade permit which the law says is needed to block off a street? Geary is the main artery to a whole neighborhood--the Richmond.

You know, to respond to PBuchman above, I often wonder in SF what the heck government is for if not controlling mobs (using whatever level of "brutality" is required) in the name of average citizens who just want to go about their business in peace.

[BrianSac]

You wouldn't be surprised and I am certian of it. It permeates our whole planning process as well where ever idea gets watered down until every single voice has been heard and consensus has been reached.

wrong thread, sorry

[BrianSac]

I know what you are saying, and I would like to add that:

I would prefer to see more out-of-state newcomers to Sacramento. The newly arrived bay area and la folks are pre-occupied with keeping Sacto small.

You would think that bay area folks would come here with big ideas, and enthusiasm to transform Sacramento into a culturaly unique place instead all they want is to buy there over-size house, and to keep Sacramento provincial. They seem to have no desire what so ever to foster or help Sacramentans see a new vision for their city which includes the addition of a new arena, cultural venues and the like. I may be exaggerating a bit, but there is a grain of truth to what I am saying.

Opps, before someone jumps all over me. Sorry,:dissy: :dissy: I thought i was speaking in a Sacramento thread. :blush:

[LongBeachUrbanist]

Thanks for that absolutely compelling evidence. I'd never have said a peep if I'd known that such irrefutable, objective, documented, corroborated legally binding third hand evidence of malfeasance were known.
I take it all back.

The only evidence I cited was undisputed. The bicyclist stated that he was unhurt, and clearly his bicycle was ridable, since he rode away.

In other words, the accident was minor. Do you dispute this?

Does a minor accident warrant the destruction of a minivan and terrorizing of a family? Simple question, no ten-dollar words required.

Of course, it is possible that Matier & Ross have completely fabricated the story, or lied about the facts collected at the scene. Is this your contention?

Hey, to save extra time, why don't we just appoint Mssrs M&R state executioners (in America we love capital punishment once proven non-innocent) as well as their existing roles of police, prosecutors, judge and juries while we're at it?

It's not wrong to pass judgement -- that's what you're doing, that's what Matier and Ross did. What we're talking about here is physical violence and destruction of property, which goes way beyond passing judgement.

[J_Taylor]

the matter here is CM is trying to get people aware that a car free lifestyle is a good thing.
Crap like this won't do it.
Heck I might just drive to DTSF next time I go and not take bart, just because of this.

[Coriander]

Does a minor accident warrant the destruction of a minivan and terrorizing of a family? Simple question, no ten-dollar words required.

Of course it doesn't but a minor accident can really rattle you, as when you're on a bike any confrontation with a car is potentially lethal. Cyclists get riled up by this and react now and then because most of the time their grievances are unheard and pass with little or no response. That said, they obviously went far too far in this case.

[BTinSF]

the matter here is CM is trying to get people aware that a car free lifestyle is a good thing.


Your point is a good one, but I'm someone living a car-free lifestyle in SF. I don't do it because some smarmy kid 1/3 my age tells me I should. I'm 61, overweight, out of shape. I don't think a bike is an option. I do it because there is no free parking anywhere and by the time you pay to park, you might as well take a cab. If you do park on the street, your car is likely to get broken into or rammed by some dingbat trying to wedge into the space in front or behind you.

MY point is that I long ago decided a car in San Francisco is just something to obsess over and suck up money. It really isn't a convenience. And I own one--I just leave it in Arizona. And ride Muni, cabs and, when unavoidable, a ZipCar.

So Critical Mass can stay out of my way. I don't need convincing. And for those times when they want to contest ownership of the streets with me, I've got pepper spray.

[Reminiscence]

:previous:

Nice. :whip:

[rs913]

the matter here is CM is trying to get people aware that a car free lifestyle is a good thing.

I don't know if they even are. I'm sure the movement started out that way, and I'm sure some people in that mass still ride with that lofty goal in mind, but I think the heart of the movement is a big FU to motorists, a confrontational revenge thing.

Just think...if you're a bicyclist and you want to improve your fellow bicyclists' situation in a constructive way, you have plenty of options besides Critical Mass. If you're just pissed off and want to get back at drivers, Critical Mass is it.

[J_Taylor]

Your point is a good one, but I'm someone living a car-free lifestyle in SF. I don't do it because some smarmy kid 1/3 my age tells me I should. I'm 61, overweight, out of shape. I don't think a bike is an option. I do it because there is no free parking anywhere and by the time you pay to park, you might as well take a cab. If you do park on the street, your car is likely to get broken into or rammed by some dingbat trying to wedge into the space in front or behind you.

MY point is that I long ago decided a car in San Francisco is just something to obsess over and suck up money. It really isn't a convenience. And I own one--I just leave it in Arizona. And ride Muni, cabs and, when unavoidable, a ZipCar.

So Critical Mass can stay out of my way. I don't need convincing. And for those times when they want to contest ownership of the streets with me, I've got pepper spray.
I never said I think it is, and I agree with your points.
I think that CM is now just a bunch of hooligans that are out there just to be in a pack, they have lost site of what CM should have been.

I'm a car guy, BUT I would love to be able to use my car only on the weekends for fun drives.

[BigKidD]

I always found CM (lately) to be a little loony since it's pretty much just a mob of cyclists roaming the city because they feel like. No matter what the message was when it started, it has clearly drifted off course since its creation imo. Also, how can a city let a bunch of people on bicycles control the streets without a permit or anything? I don't see stuff like this happening in other world-class cities, give me a break SF. And some of these people need to get over themselves.

Furthermore, the citizens of SF own the streets, not a mob of people on bicycles that disrespect other people's property. Perhaps these bicycles should spread their message to other cities, like Philadelphia and see how the motorists there react. I'm sure they would not be as tolerant as an average San Franciscan.

[Upward]

Just for the record: I've been hit by a bicyclist; on my motor scooter! I stopped at a Stop Sign and, "CRASH!" Into my rear came a woman on a bike. "I didn't know you were going to stop!" she says. Of course she didn't--cyclist rarely do stop. But other users of the street mostly actually obey traffic laws, a foreign concept to many cyclists.

I've had other near misses, by the way--most often from people whizzing down Turk St. the wrong way and nearly creaming me as I come out of my building's parking garage and look to the right--the only direction from which traffic could be legally coming--before pulling out.

This is the problem with bicyclists everywhere. They want to be treated as pedestrians when that's convenient for them, and as cars when that's convenient. Basically, they want everyone and everything on the road to yield to them. It's especially a problem on university campuses (at least, the ones I've seen).

[Ronin]

Did anyone happen to catch the episode of Bullrun last night? One of the contestants yelled out the window at a bicyclist for being in the street, but his driver quickly pulled him back, telling him that in SF, the rules for bikes is different, and that they have the right of way. To the average person, such a rule is pretty ridiculous, as you can see.

[Reminiscence]

Another article written:

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/163/sfcmrl8.jpg

Clash reignites road wars
Skirmish between driver, Critical Mass participants triggers another round of debate about monthly ride

Michael Cabanatuan, Jaxon Van Derbeken, Cecilia M. Vega, Chronicle Staff Writers

Thursday, April 5, 2007

San Francisco's often-heated dispute between bicyclists and drivers flared anew Wednesday as news of a confrontation between a minivan driver and Critical Mass riders sparked outrage.

In blogs, as well as on the streets of San Francisco, Critical Mass seemed to turn everyone into a critic. An SFGate.com blog received hundreds of comments, many vitriolic, about Critical Mass. Mayor Gavin Newsom denounced the aggressive attitude of some cyclists, and police officials said they wanted to meet with biking activists about the monthly ride.

The incident that reignited an angry debate over the rights of bicyclists and motorists occurred Friday as the Critical Mass ride coasted to an end in Japantown at about 9 p.m. Susan Ferrando of Redwood City said hundreds of bicyclists surrounded her minivan, pounding on it and eventually using their bicycles to smash the rear window, causing $5,300 in damage. Police said she might have inadvertently tapped one of the bicyclists' tires.

Bicyclists who witnessed the event countered that Ferrando had accelerated recklessly through a crowd of riders, hitting one and knocking him from his bike, then attempted to flee the scene before riders surrounded the vehicle. They complained that police didn't charge her with a crime.

The incident is another bruise to the uneasy relationship that has long existed in San Francisco between bicyclists who feel the city doesn't do enough to protect and support them and drivers who believe city policies to encourage bicycling and the use of transit hinder their mobility.

Critical Mass, which takes place on the last Friday of each month, draws hundreds and sometimes thousands of bicyclists from around the Bay Area who ride through the streets of the city along a route that's announced just before the ride starts at 6 p.m. The ride, which has no official leaders and is not sponsored by any group, aims to send a message to the public, especially those in cars, that bicyclists should have equal and safe access to the roads.

But Critical Mass has often generated more controversy and ill will than support. In 1997, Mayor Willie Brown called the event "the ultimate arrogance" and ordered police to crack down. They arrested more than 100 cyclists, though charges were later dropped. "Massers," as the bike riders call themselves, celebrated the ride's 10th anniversary in 2002, and even that ride angered motorists, some of whom said riders shouted obscenities at them and scratched or dented their cars.

In October, around Halloween, 200 cyclists attempted to drive onto the Golden Gate Bridge but were driven off by five California Highway Patrol cars.

"They formed a skirmish line with patrol vehicles and basically forced them off the bridge -- once the bicyclists realized that this wasn't a game, that we weren't playing, they turned around and rode off the bridge,'' CHP Officer Mary Ziegenbein said.

Friday's event, however, seemed to generate an unprecedented outburst of anger -- from riders, Chronicle readers and the general public.

"I f -- hate Critical Mass,'' said Mishka Generic, 33, a bike messenger who lives in Oakland. "They give everybody who rides a bike a bad name. It's not that all of them are bad, it's just that when you put that number of people together, you get some -- holes."

Generic, a bicycle messenger for 14 years, said she participated in some of the early Critical Mass rides but got turned off by the hostility and arrogance of some of the bicyclists.

"There are more reasonable ways of going about making your point,'' she said.

Fellow messenger Nick Whitacre, 35, of San Francisco acknowledged that Critical Mass has some troublemakers in its ranks but said he still likes the event.

"It can never be a bad thing when you see hundreds of people riding bikes down the street,'' he said.

A Financial District worker disagreed.

"The problem with Critical Mass is (the riders) don't feel they have to abide by any rules or laws,'' said Jack Rina, 62, a San Francisco sales manager who walks to and from work. Critical Mass participants nearly mowed him down as he tried to cross the street Friday, he said.

"San Francisco is a pedestrian-friendly city and a friendly city -- most times,'' he said. "Critical Mass takes away from that.''

Leah Shahum, executive director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, said the city remains a decidedly unfriendly place for bicyclists, who frequently are hit by cars, run off the road, and treated as obstacles rather than people.

Kate McCarthy, the coalition's membership and volunteer organizer, agreed.

"Every day, I have the experience of having car drivers treat me like I'm doing something wrong just riding my bike to work,'' she said. "The police won't even ticket someone for hit-and-run against a bicyclist.''

McCarthy said she witnessed Friday's incident, which she said involved a small group of bicyclists. She believed that police should have charged the driver but said it was inexcusable for people to damage the minivan.

Newsom called for an examination of the incident.

"It's a terrible incident, and I don't want to overreact to it," Newsom said. "But we are going to address what's been going on. We're going to have a chance to calmly take a look at what the protocols have been."

He also had harsh words for the bike coalition.

"What happens in certain circumstances like this is the bicycle community, the bike advocates, do themselves a remarkable disservice when they allow bad actors to come in and break the law in an aggressive manner," Newsom said. "I would encourage the bike coalition to come up and say, 'Hey, we won't put up with this. Enough is enough.' "

Shahum said the coalition does not sponsor or coordinate Critical Mass and neither condones nor condemns the event. "We couldn't end it if we wanted to,'' she said.

She did, however, condemn the confrontation, saying, "The driver started a chain of violence that escalated. Both sides are to blame."

San Francisco police said they want to meet with the bike coalition to discuss the incident. The coalition's director said she would be happy to meet with the police to discuss "the aggression (against bicyclists) happening on our streets every day of the month.''

Sgt. Steve Mannina stressed that the incident was part of "an unpermitted event.''

"The SFPD will not facilitate the ride or give the riders preference over other street traffic,'' Mannina said. "Members will monitor the ride to protect life and property and minimize unnecessary traffic delays.''

[Buckeye Native 001]

I think that CM is now just a bunch of hooligans that are out there just to be in a pack, they have lost site of what CM should have been.

Kind of like some of the people in PETA.

[coyotetrickster]

I always found CM (lately) to be a little loony since it's pretty much just a mob of cyclists roaming the city because they feel like. No matter what the message was when it started, it has clearly drifted off course since its creation imo. Also, how can a city let a bunch of people on bicycles control the streets without a permit or anything? I don't see stuff like this happening in other world-class cities, give me a break SF. And some of these people need to get over themselves.

Furthermore, the citizens of SF own the streets, not a mob of people on bicycles that disrespect other people's property. Perhaps these bicycles should spread their message to other cities, like Philadelphia and see how the motorists there react. I'm sure they would not be as tolerant as an average San Franciscan.

I had a very unpleasant run-in the other year with some CM stragglers. I was crossing Valencia (at McCoppin), on foot, and was kamikaze'd by several riders after I yelled at one guy who flew by me in the crosswalk (against the light), and yes they were choice comments regarding his parentage and patrimony, but the experience of being surrounded by four other riders, circling and lecturing me (yes lecturing me) on their right to ride turned me against the bicycle coalition, and bike riders in general. I'm going with the confused suburban family as the victims here, not the rider.

[BTinSF]

San Francisco police said they want to meet with the bike coalition to discuss the incident. The coalition's director said she would be happy to meet with the police to discuss "the aggression (against bicyclists) happening on our streets every day of the month.''



I think that says it all. There will be no agreement about the incident, so IMHO police should just enforce the law.

[pip]

I'm looking foward to hundreds, probably in the span of only a couple of months, of lenghthy articles of cars hitting pedestrians or bicycle riders and the car driver taking off.

[Richard Mlynarik]

Another article written:

Clash reignites road wars[...]
Scary!
http://www.jwz.org/images/img_2478.jpg
+
http://www.jwz.org/images/000prw5a.jpg
=
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/163/sfcmrl8.jpg

[SC_00_05]

Followed by third-hand regurgitatation of the Matier&Ross hit piece!


Thanks for that absolutely compelling evidence.
I'd never have said a peep if I'd known that such irrefutable, objective, documented, corroborated legally binding third hand evidence of malfeasance were known.
I take it all back.

You you sure showed me how to prove innocence in a court of law. In America!

And there's nothing like a sanctimonious non sequitur to clinch the deal!

I'm sold.

Hey, to save extra time, why don't we just appoint Mssrs M&R state executioners (in America we love capital punishment once vaguely suspected or framed as non-innocent) as well as their existing roles of police, prosecutors, judge and juries while we're at it?

No way! An arrogant and snobbish reply from a San Franciscan to someone from LA? Impossible!

[SC_00_05]

I think the city's "hands-off" approach is probably the best course of action (or inaction, if you prefer). Any sort of crackdown would necessarily create a confrontation between the mob and police, and usually such confrontations lead to violence on an order of magnitude far greater than the incident described in the story (think 1960's protests, fire hoses, police beatings, etc.) As terrible as this incident appears to have been, I fear that it would pale in comparison to the sort of brutality that would necessitate controlling the mob.

Perhaps there is a better solution, but I don't see it.

Let me get this straight. It's better to let a mob do as it likes rather than create some violence to stop them from hurting others. Great words to live by right there.:yuck:

[Buckeye Native 001]

Scary!
http://www.jwz.org/images/img_2478.jpg
+
http://www.jwz.org/images/000prw5a.jpg
=
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/163/sfcmrl8.jpg

Um, so what the hell are you trying to prove exactly?

No way! An arrogant and snobbish reply from a San Franciscan to someone from LA? Impossible!

None of that needed. For once, the majority of SF and LA forumers are in agreement with each other.

[rs913]

I knew this was all a conspiracy with Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum behind it.

[PBuchman]

Let me get this straight. It's better to let a mob do as it likes rather than create some violence to stop them from hurting others. Great words to live by right there.:yuck:

Government has a responsibility to maintain domestic tranquility in all but the most extraordinary of circumstances. Incidents such as this one - while deplorable - are relatively infrequent, and, in context of the sort of crimes that occur on a daily basis within the city, relatively minor.

Furthermore, considering the potential damage that could result from a confrontational approach to this problem (i.e. crimes committed by the police, crimes committed against the police, crimes committed against businesses, disruption of commerce...not to mention a potential backlash from the mob against ordinary citizens), I do not believe that a crackdown is the most pragmatic solution.

I think it is in the city's best interest to treat crimes like this one on an individual basis, rather than to inflame the situation by implementing draconian policies, or by putting the police into an unnecessary confrontation with the bicyclists. I suspect that this has been the line of reasoning employed by both mayoral administrations over the past decade.

Furthermore, if you want to risk city's welfare in the name of fighting crime, there are certainly a lot more serious crimes to address than a mob of assholes on bicycles.

[SC_00_05]

Um, so what the hell are you trying to prove exactly?



None of that needed. For once, the majority of SF and LA forumers are in agreement with each other.
You're correct, I guess I just couldn't resist after seeing that response. My apologies.

[SC_00_05]

Government has a responsibility to maintain domestic tranquility in all but the most extraordinary of circumstances. Incidents such as this one - while deplorable - are relatively infrequent, and, in context of the sort of crimes that occur on a daily basis within the city, relatively minor.

Furthermore, considering the potential damage that could result from a confrontational approach to this problem (i.e. crimes committed by the police, crimes committed against the police, crimes committed against businesses, disruption of commerce...not to mention a potential backlash from the mob against ordinary citizens), I do not believe that a crackdown is the most pragmatic solution.

I think it is in the city's best interest to treat crimes like this one on an individual basis, rather than to inflame the situation by implementing draconian policies, or by putting the police into an unnecessary confrontation with the bicyclists. I suspect that this has been the line of reasoning employed by both mayoral administrations over the past decade.

Furthermore, if you want to risk city's welfare in the name of fighting crime, there are certainly a lot more serious crimes to address than a mob of assholes on bicycles.

Replace the mob of liberal enviro bicyclists with a mob of "urban youth". Does your example of peaceful police restraint for the common good still apply to you as they smash up a car with kids inside?

The only way these critical mass tough guys had the balls to go off on this vehicle is that they knew they had the numbers to intimidate, police wouldn't act, and there were relatively defenseless people inside the car.

[Reminiscence]

More cops ... now I dont know if this is a good idea or a bad idea:

Newsom may ask for more police in wake of bike-ride violence

Apr 6, 2007 3:00 AM (6 hrs ago)

by Alexandria Rocha, The Examiner

After meeting with San Francisco police Chief Heather Fong on Thursday, Mayor Gavin Newsom said more police could be assigned to monitor future Critical Mass bicycle rides in San Francisco.

Newsom met with Fong in response to an incident Monday in which at least one Critical Mass cyclist allegedly shattered a Redwood City family’s car window with a bike after the three-hour ride.

On Thursday, Newsom said he doesn’t want to overreact to the incident, which has caused some San Francisco cyclists to become defensive. He said most Critical Mass rides have been fairly tame in recent years, although there have been “incidents.”

San Francisco assigns 20 to 30 officers to monitor — not regulate — Critical Mass rides, Newsom said. Critical Mass rides take place on the last Friday of every month, and thousands of cyclists take to the streets, often ignoring basic traffic laws, to promote alternative transportation methods.

Last week’s incident has highlighted the unofficial rides, which have been held in San Francisco since 1992 and have no leadership.

Susan Ferrando, of Redwood City, said she was leaving Japantown on Monday at around 9 p.m. in a family van with her husband and their five children, ages 9 to 13, when Critical Mass cyclists chased them down and attacked them, swarming their vehicle at the intersection of Post and Gough streets. One cyclist shattered the van’s rear window with a bike, police reports stated.

Cyclists, however, have said Ferrando bolted through a group of cyclists milling about at the end of the ride. They said the cyclists rode after Ferrando, yelling for her to stop, when she allegedly hit a cyclist and kept driving.

Newsom said the San Francisco Police Department is reviewing its protocols for responding to incidents that happen during the rides. He said he has reached out to the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, who is not responsible for the events, but “they can certainly help,” he said.

“I don’t want to see a cyclist injured anywhere in this city,” he said Thursday.

[dimondpark]

Why? Did Critical Mass have a parade permit which the law says is needed to block off a street? Geary is the main artery to a whole neighborhood--the Richmond.

If the cops knew this bunch of ferrets was going to do this and they knew she was headed right into them, then hell yes, they should have stopped her.

Speaking of which, since they have no permit in the first place, why the hell doesnt the police department stop them and ticket them for disrupting traffic, running red lights and all the other stupid things they get away with?

no, there's plenty of blame to go around.

[bikesound]

My account of this incident: This was towards the end of the ride (after splitting off and dissipating). We had about 30 people by the time we were leaving Japantown when I heard a noise, which I could even hear over the music, and I turned my head to see a minivan on my left just having run over a bike and saw the rider on the ground. Riders nearby yelled at the driver to stop and the minivan just sped away. Many people in the ride chased after the van and surrounded it after catching up with it at the red light. The driver had her hand pressed on the horn the entire time. The cops got there pretty much right away as they were following right behind us. I rode away with the rest of the ride but some people stayed behind to deal with the cops. I didn't see the rear window get smashed but I can say that I only saw the couple sitting in the front of the minivan as the rest of the windows were heavily tinted and we could not see that there was anyone else in the vehicle.

If anyone cares, you can see that the windows were tinted in this video of the awful KRON4 news report:
http://tinyurl.com/27v4pf


Upcoming bay area rides for those interested:

April 6th - Oakland Critical Mass (every first friday)
6pm @ Frank Ogawa Plaza (12th St. BART entrance on Broadway & 14th St)

April 13th - Berkeley Critical Mass (every second friday)
6pm @ Downtown Berkley BART on Shattuck Ave

April 20th - Walnut Creek Critical Mass (every third friday)
6pm @ Walnut Creek BART

April 27th - San Francisco Critical Mass (every last friday)
6pm @ Justin Herman Plaza (near Embarcadero BART on Market St.)

[innov8]

Cops standing around while windows are being smashed right in
front of them... :maddown: someone should have be arrested.

[PBuchman]

Replace the mob of liberal enviro bicyclists with a mob of "urban youth". Does your example of peaceful police restraint for the common good still apply to you as they smash up a car with kids inside?

All other factors being equal, of course the "peaceful police restraint for the common good" still applies.

Realistically, however, you know as well as I do that mobs of urban youth engaged in criminal activity (I assume you mean gangs) generally pose a more substantial threat to the rest of society than do a group of eco-happy bicyclists. This incident was deplorable, but nobody was hurt, and in the end it was essentially an act of vandalism...more or less. That is a far cry from some of the more heinous crimes often associated with gang violence.

Incidentally, from Reminisence's article, it sounds to me like the mayor is taking the right course of action. I think higher police presence is justified in helping to defuse situations like this one, provided that there is not an overly confrontational law enforcement policy in place (one might wish to recall the disaster that ensued in 1997 when Willie Brown tried to "lay down the law" in the wake of similar CM incidents).

And yes, in an ideal world, the bicyclist(s) who smashed the window should have been arrested. It is understandable, however, why the police may have felt it better to mollify the situation than to make an arrest.

[BTinSF]

mobs of urban youth engaged in criminal activity (I assume you mean gangs) generally pose a more substantial threat to the rest of society than do a group of eco-happy bicyclists.

See, that's where we evidently differ. I think the people who participate in Critical Mass these days (perhaps not in the beginning) are a mob of urban youth on bicycles, differing little from other such mobs. The thing is no longer about changing minds and encouraging bicycle use for the benefit of all. It's about power and showing who's boss. It's about "we can do this and you can't (or won't) stop us."

When I was in college in downtown Baltimore in the 1960's, we used to do the same thing (but only once a year): form a mob and march out onto Charles St. (a main thoroughfare) and block it. Back then (before Vietnam protests got ugly), we knew the cops wouldn't wade into a crowd of Baltimore's elite touth. It had nothing to do with anything except showing our power. And that's what Critical mass does. It was very childish of us and it is very childish of Critical Mass and it's time for the adults to intervene.

[Richard Mlynarik]

[...]It was very childish of us and it is very childish of Critical Mass and it's time for the adults to intervene.This grown-up, presumably:
http://www.drudgereport.com/newsom.jpg

[Ronin]

Why does the thread title have to mention that she is "suburban?" As if she is a worse driver, and this could never have happened to a person living in SF proper.

[BigKidD]

I guess I can't expect much from the Bay Area anymore than a bunch of idealist individuals mobbing the streets and interfering with the common good of the citizens of SF. In my opinion, CM is a complete joke now and should not be tolerated. When did a rambunctious minority take over the common good of a city?

[BTinSF]

Why does the thread title have to mention that she is "suburban?" As if she is a worse driver, and this could never have happened to a person living in SF proper.

Why not? It's part of the facts of the case and many people here do make an issue of suburbs vs city.

[Ronin]

Did the bikers know she was suburban? Did they attack her because of that fact? NO.

The only relevance it might have had is that she could have been unfamiliar with the roads and/or the event, but that could happen to anyone no matter where they are from.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

My account of this incident: This was towards the end of the ride (after splitting off and dissipating). We had about 30 people by the time we were leaving Japantown when I heard a noise, which I could even hear over the music, and I turned my head to see a minivan on my left just having run over a bike and saw the rider on the ground. Riders nearby yelled at the driver to stop and the minivan just sped away. Many people in the ride chased after the van and surrounded it after catching up with it at the red light. The driver had her hand pressed on the horn the entire time. The cops got there pretty much right away as they were following right behind us. I rode away with the rest of the ride but some people stayed behind to deal with the cops. I didn't see the rear window get smashed but I can say that I only saw the couple sitting in the front of the minivan as the rest of the windows were heavily tinted and we could not see that there was anyone else in the vehicle.

Your account is completely different from the newspaper column. If your version is correct, the bicyclists were attempting to stop someone who had just knowingly committed a criminal act. That would change everything.

Since I wasn't there, I don't know whose version of the story is more true.

I'd think the police report would indicate the condition of the bicycle, since the police supposedly interviewed the cyclist, who then rode away. A bicycle run over by a minivan would not be ridable.

By the way, even if your version is true, there is still no excuse for the damage to the minivan. But it would explain the bicyclists' emotional reaction.

[What is a Rivercat?]

A person is smart, people are stupid assholes.

[tuy]

My account of this incident: This was towards the end of the ride (after splitting off and dissipating). We had about 30 people by the time we were leaving Japantown when I heard a noise, which I could even hear over the music, and I turned my head to see a minivan on my left just having run over a bike and saw the rider on the ground. Riders nearby yelled at the driver to stop and the minivan just sped away. Many people in the ride chased after the van and surrounded it after catching up with it at the red light.

Cyclists, however, have said Ferrando bolted through a group of cyclists milling about at the end of the ride. They said the cyclists rode after Ferrando, yelling for her to stop, when she allegedly hit a cyclist and kept driving.


Contrast these two accounts. The Cyclists can't even get their stories straight.

It seems that the driver was trying to get out to the street, but couldn't because of bikers blocking her. She finally found an opening and went through which infuriated the cyclists. They chased her, one of them got hit ( or rode into the vehicle) and things escalated.

[greenmidtown]

the only thing that's shocking about all this to me is the rush to judgement. bicyclists get hit, intimidated, and verbally abused all the time. just the other day when I was riding on the side of 16th st. in downtown Sac a lady had to pull up next to me and scream epithets at me for sharing the road. I don't know what she screamed because I had my ipod playing so I caught up with her at the next light and knocked on her window hoping to talk. she suddenly changed her demeanor and got scared. she's driving in a ton of steel and thinks she can intimidate me in my 25lb. bike and just drive away while I'm sweating. I didn't and wouldn't ever damage someone's car for abusing me verbally or physically but I can understand why out of frustration, particularly if a biker was knocked down, another biker would do that.

I mean give me a break! drivers mow us down and literally kill us all the time, how often does the opposite occur?

[rs913]

I think this debate is just showing how, while it's easy for one "side" to say it (i.e. the bad state of relations between Bay Area drivers and bicyclists) is the other "side's" fault, or call out the other side, doing so ignores the bigger picture. Seems to me like what's really going on here, as is the case with many disputes, is an escalation of tension in which both sides take the bait over and over, and ultimately become equally at "fault". The articles posted to this thread really drive that point home. They're a little scary.

Going back to Critical Mass, that's why I hate them. They're contributing to that escalation...and it's the escalation, not the inherent evilness of one side or the other, that's making the situation worse.

[pyropius]

If this happened in Texas, the motorist would shoot the bicyclists dead, and be protected under the newly strengthened "Shoot to Kill" law:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17820464/


The new law, which takes affect on September 1, extends an exception to a statute that required a person to retreat in the face of a criminal attack. The exception was in the case of an intruder unlawfully entering a person’s home.

The law extends a person’s right to stand their ground beyond the home to vehicles and workplaces, allowing the reasonable use of deadly force, the governor’s office said.

The reasonable use of lethal force will be allowed if an intruder is:


Committing certain violent crimes, such as murder or sexual assault, or is attempting to commit such crimes
Unlawfully trying to enter a protected place
Unlawfully trying to remove a person from a protected place.


The law also provides civil immunity for a person who lawfully slays an intruder or attacker in such situations.

[BigKidD]

And it continues,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/08/BAG0SP504J1.DTL

Another run-in with Critical Mass
Shattered window of family car wasn't only encounter -- limo had harrowing clash, too

Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross

Sunday, April 8, 2007
Dennis Webb says his limousine was damaged March 30. Chro...

Make of it as you will, but there was another ugly confrontation during the last Critical Mass ride in San Francisco, not just the one involving a Redwood City family celebrating a birthday in Japantown.

Motorists and bike riders alike have been up in arms since our yarn Wednesday about bicyclists shattering the back window of a car that had unwittingly found itself in the middle of a pedaling Critical Mass pack. Motorists were outraged over the conduct of the cyclists; the riders insist they got a bum rap for a driver they thought should have been arrested for hit-and-run.

Whatever the case, this type of scrape isn't exactly unheard of.

It turns out that a couple of hours before the Japantown incident, about 7 p.m. March 30, a limousine driver had a run-in with a Critical Mass cyclist down in the Tenderloin.

The result: one dented limo hood, one limo tire slashed and one Critical Mass rider getting booked for felony malicious mischief.

Limo driver Dennis Webb, 46, told us it all started when he was driving a group of four young women to a club South of Market and a female bicyclist blocked his limo on Hyde Street, near McAllister. Webb said he leaned out the window and asked the cyclist to move. Instead, according to the police report, the cyclist got off her bike, unwrapped a lollypop and started licking it.

Webb said he got out of his car to talk to her when another male rider also pulled in front of his limo.

After briefly exchanging words with the man, Webb said he grabbed the male cyclist's bike and tried to pull it out of the way. He then got back into his limo in hopes of going around the riders.

Before he could move, however, Webb said another cyclist -- who he later identified to police as 31-year-old Gabriel Nugent -- smacked into the front driver's side of his car, then punched the hood with a u-shape bicycle lock, denting it.

Cyclist Nugent, however, told officers that he only hit the car with his lock after Webb had gunned his engine.

No one disputes that after the limo was struck, driver Webb grabbed Nugent's bike, apparently to keep the cyclist from leaving until the cops could be summoned.

In the meantime, according to officers we interviewed, other cyclists surrounded the limo driver and one knocked his cell phone to the ground.

Eileen Shields, a San Francisco Health Department spokeswoman who was participating in the ride along with other members of the department, told us she passed by just as things were getting ugly.

Shields said the driver was trying to elude about eight cyclists who had surrounded him and who were chanting, "He tried to run him over, he tried to run him over ...''

Next there was a loud pop -- as someone slashed the limo's tire.

According to Sgt. Gavin McEachern, who was among the officers who arrived at the scene, an unidentified bicyclist reached into the front seat of Webb's limo and stole his keys from the ignition, then rode off. Webb was stranded, and his limo blocked traffic in the street for two hours before it could finally be towed.

After interviewing everyone involved and a number of witnesses, police took the bike lock into evidence and arrested Nugent on charges of felony malicious mischief and impeding traffic. A spokesperson for the district attorney said Nugent was later released on $20,100 bail and is scheduled to appear in court May 11 on a reduced misdemeanor charge. Nugent did not return phone calls Friday seeking comment.

"It saddened me to watch this, and a lot of people stopped (to observe),'' the Health Department's Shields said. "A lot felt what was happening to the driver was terrible.''

Shields said it had started out as a beautiful evening, and she and friends were excited about participating in the ride, which drew anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 riders to Justin Herman Plaza at the start.

"Everyone was in a great mood,'' she said.

But while many people waved to the riders as they crossed through downtown, Shields said there was a noticeable tension in the air when the cyclists pedaled past Union Square, where a number of motorists stuck in traffic began honking their horns.

"That just invites guys with attitudes to pound on the cars,'' she said. "It really saddens me that this element is part of Critical Mass.''

Webb, who has been driving for 30 years, said he had never even heard of the group until his run-in. "But I tell people about them now,'' he said.

Leah Shahum, executive director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, told us she was unaware of the episode, but said, "We don't condone violence on our streets anytime, whether during a Critical Mass ride or anytime."

She added, "Most people know that 99 percent of bicyclists and drivers do the right thing, and there's always 1 percent who cause problems for all of us.''

One man band: One of the more interesting side notes to state Sen. Don Perata's proposed statewide ballot measure calling for withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq was that he pretty much did it on his own, without consultation with fellow Democrats or lawmakers.

Most didn't even know what he was up to until they heard about the press conference.

As for the idea the anti-Iraq war measure is a ploy to draw more Democrats to the polls and therefore increase the odds of passing a term-limit extension so that Perata and other lawmakers could stay in office longer?

"Have you seen the polling numbers?" Perata replied. "At this point, I'm not even sure if there is going to be a term-limit extension on the ballot."

On the lighter side: Sign painters union chief and Port Commissioner Mike Hardeman had an Opening Day he won't soon forget.

He was scheduled to go to the dentist. But, what the heck -- why not catch a few innings first, and, besides, there was that pregame All-Star luncheon.

He went. He ate. And right in the middle of a bite, out flew his front tooth.

The next thing you know, Hardeman, Felipe Alou and Juan Marichal were down on their knees searching for the lost chomper -- only to have it found by Gaylord Perry, who was sitting at a nearby table where the tooth had landed.

Meanwhile, across town at a neighborhood bar in San Francisco's Glen Park neighborhood, they hoped to lure in customers for an Opening Day party with some "common cents.'' Scrawled on a sign hanging in the window:

Beer: $8 at PacBell, $4 here.

Hot dogs: $6 at Pac Bell, free here.

[POLA]

i can't believe you guys are such wimps... why is everyone so scared of bicycles?

[BigKidD]

i can't believe you guys are such wimps... why is everyone so scared of bicycles?
I'm not sure. Perhaps their lack of common sense.

[sf_eddo]

I think what the Critical Mass participants did to the minivan/SUV was inexcusable and horrific. However, when I first read the original article from M&R (the one in the original post), I thought it was entirely one-sided and biased and meant to rile people up rather than present a fair account of what happened.

And it looks like they were successful at it.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Regardless, it'd be nice if the motorists and bikers could co-exist together peacefully.

/miketoronto rant

[Reminiscence]

We might as well integrate pedestrians in the mix as well, that'll probably be thier next target. I know I've had a few run ins already. :(

[Inkdaub]

OK. I don't buy the "innocents" line. Not without proof.
Which we're never going to see, absent some videographer being imprisoned or something.
I've been hit by motorists (not while riding in CM, and not even while on a bicycle), who've subsequently sworn up and down that nothing happened.

(Another handy fact to remember: assault with a motor vehicle is always a victimless crime -- and you don't even lose any licence points! -- if you remember the magic words "I didn't see him".)

Having a bunch of "terrified" suburban teenagers in the minivan is no guarantee of reasonability, either: I've heard astonishingly psychotic belligerence from the mouths of soccer moms with kids in tow.

If I had to bet on this -- which I don't and won't -- it would be that a steamed-up suburbodroid male, already indignant that San Francisco doesn't have the freeway access right to the strip mall it is one's right to have -- lost his cool and attempted to force his way into a pack of bicycles, then got all indignant when they didn't bow down before the might of his two tons of metal like they're supposed to.

Matier&Ross are clearly playing this up for whatever they can get,
and we're clearly found a choir to be preached to here.
Continue as you were.

I agree with this one hundred percent.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

^ You agree that the minivan driver is guilty until proven innocent???

OK. I don't buy the "innocents" line. Not without proof.

[sf_eddo]

Like always, it's always a couple of jerkoffs who ruin it for the majority of people. The San Francisco Bike Coalition last week had a Critical Manners ride.

"Critical Manners: a revolutionary act of courtesy. Come put the nice back in the bike world with critical manners! A helmet-wearing, bell-ringing, blinkie-sportin' good time for you and all your bike friends. Practice synchronized signaling, single file riding, stopping at stop signs and NOT blowing red lights. Critical Manners will brake for pedestrians, trolleys, and even the occasional SUV. If you've ridden in Critical Mass, you know about the "testosterone brigade". Maybe it's time you rode with Critical Manners. We take obedience of the law ridiculously seriously."

[Reminiscence]

Wow. What a change that is. I guess this means its safe for me to come back to the city. ;)

[greenmidtown]

Wow. What a change that is. I guess this means its safe for me to come back to the city. ;)

If you fear bicyclists you have bigger issues to settle. You're like a hunter who fears deer :haha:

[rs913]

How long will it be before we hear about a run-in between a Critical Manners rider and a pack of angry Critical Mass riders?

[Buckeye Native 001]

How long will it be before we hear about a run-in between a Critical Manners rider and a pack of angry Critical Mass riders?

Wouldn't that be a sight to see...

[POLA]

god! you guys sound like a bunch of kranky old men...

Damn kids!

[Reminiscence]

If you fear bicyclists you have bigger issues to settle. You're like a hunter who fears deer :haha:

I dont fear bicyclists in general, just these radical riders who's only goal is chaos.

[crisp444]

Wow... that's one of the most disgusting things I've heard on this site... the lunatics who did this to that family deserve to be arrested and this "Critical Mass" crap should be stopped immediately.

[crisp444]

Like always, it's always a couple of jerkoffs who ruin it for the majority of people. The San Francisco Bike Coalition last week had a Critical Manners ride.

"Critical Manners: a revolutionary act of courtesy. Come put the nice back in the bike world with critical manners! A helmet-wearing, bell-ringing, blinkie-sportin' good time for you and all your bike friends. Practice synchronized signaling, single file riding, stopping at stop signs and NOT blowing red lights. Critical Manners will brake for pedestrians, trolleys, and even the occasional SUV. If you've ridden in Critical Mass, you know about the "testosterone brigade". Maybe it's time you rode with Critical Manners. We take obedience of the law ridiculously seriously."

Good for them!!!

[BigKidD]

Wow... that's one of the most disgusting things I've heard on this site... the lunatics who did this to that family deserve to be arrested and this "Critical Mass" crap should be stopped immediately.
I wish. But SF is just too dam accommodating to everyone no matter what they do or represent, usually not a bad thing, but sometimes it goes a little too far. I don't see critical mass situations happening in Philadelphia nor would a driver there allow such idiocracy to be tolerated.

[POLA]

you are aware that there is a crical mass ride in every major city in the US? Including a very large one in Phili...

[BTinSF]

god! you guys sound like a bunch of kranky old men...

Damn kids!

:whip: Lay off the "kranky old men" hate speech!:whip: I AM a kranky old man and I agree with Reminiscence. Critical mass riders are like deer with teeth who run in a pack. They can get very nasty as this incident demonstrates. I also have issues with a few individual bike riders also such as the ones who (illegaly) careen down the sidewalks in front of my building on Van Ness, dodging pedestrians (usually--but sometimes not).

I simply don't think your mode of transportation determines whether you are a "good guy" or not. It's how you handle that mode of transportation. When you try to dominate and intimidate other users of the pavement, as many drivers do and as Critical mass does, you are a bad guy.

[BigKidD]

you are aware that there is a crical mass ride in every major city in the US? Including a very large one in Phili...
Well, thanks for the correction. Although I still think the whole display is lacking intelligence, but that's my opinion. In all fairness though, I hate pushy drivers and a pushy bicyclist should fall into the same category as an idiot behind the wheel.

[condodweller]

If I had to bet on this -- which I don't and won't -- it would be that a steamed-up suburbodroid male, already indignant that San Francisco doesn't have the freeway access right to the strip mall it is one's right to have -- lost his cool and attempted to force his way into a pack of bicycles, then got all indignant when they didn't bow down before the might of his two tons of metal like they're supposed to.

I've seen enough bike-on-car violence at CM so as to disagree. Many times, from my old office on Market Street, I watched as riders would bait motorists into confrontation. I've had abuse shouted at me when I have tried to cross Market Street on foot during CM -- apparently they don't like pedestrians, either. And a few months ago, the CM route was up Franklin Street, where, from my apartment balcony, I watched as CM riders simultaneously block cars in at the O'Farrell, Geary and Post intersections, and proceed to bang on their hoods. From several stories up, it was abundantly evident how organized the CM obstruction and violence was -- a handfuld of riders were shuttling back and forth between the blocked intersections to communicate with those doing the blocking, probably to let them know how close the cops were (the cops slowly worked their way up Franklin, making exceedingly lame attempts to maintain order, intersection by intersection). Critical Ass is an excellent nickname for this abomination, and I am inclined to believe motorists (even suburbanites in minivans) over these jerks.

[POLA]

wow... nice ASSumtions. i bet you think all skateboarders are theifs too.

[condodweller]

wow... nice ASSumtions. i bet you think all skateboarders are theifs too.

No, just vandals :D

[BTinSF]

No, just vandals :D

Precisely, but they do steal from taxpayers in the sense that I can't imagine how much money SF has had to spend to protect public property from being badly damaged by these selfish little pr*cks.

[BigKidD]

Critical Mass isn't the only alternatively-weird thing Friscans do with their roads. Here's another one:

http://www.youtube.com/v/sWnff376PEI





At least that's an interesting activity that looks to be very fun, yet a little dangerous. CM(A) should ride down Lombard st. every time they go out and make a race out of it too.

[Reminiscence]

I personally dont mind sharing the road with cars, bicycles, and so on. However, my generosity ends when people break the laws. I as a pedestrian follow the rules of the road, I stop when it says so and I look both ways before crossing the street. In my eyes, this group that goes around breaking every traffic law in the book is no different than all the other horrible drivers out there. We all have the right to share the road, but do we have to turn this into Darwinism? :no:

[tech12]

Precisely, but they do steal from taxpayers in the sense that I can't imagine how much money SF has had to spend to protect public property from being badly damaged by these selfish little pr*cks.

Hey, San Francisco was THE skateboarding capitol for years. People from around the world knew of SF and came here just to skate. If you think about it, it's really something to be proud of...Then the city started cracking down on it, and they put metal blocks on some well known spots, and entirely destroyed some others. SF is no longer the big destination.... though the scene is still alive and obviously will never be dead.

Sorry for going off topic...


Of course I agree with some of the points critical mass tries to make, but on the whole, it's stupid. Being a bicyclist gives you no entitlement over any motorist. And smashing minivans full of terrified children doesn't prove anything except that you're an asshole.

[BTinSF]

Hey, San Francisco was THE skateboarding capitol for years. People from around the world knew of SF and came here just to skate. If you think about it, it's really something to be proud of...Then the city started cracking down on it, and they put metal blocks on some well known spots, and entirely destroyed some others. SF is no longer the big destination.... though the scene is still alive and obviously will never be dead.



I'm well aware of that. I watched skate boarders from the East Bay come out of the Embarcadero BART Station and begin to destroy the new retaining walls and other features in front of the Ferry Building before they were even complete. I personally called the cops several times when I saw them. Same with the new Main Library. The city did not want nor expect to have to install those chunky metal blocks--they are an extra expense and ugly--but without them the place would have been a wreck.

What makes me proud is beautiful new landscaping and architecture, not lawless teens doing what some teens have always done: wrecking things built by adults. Oh yes, and I'm proud (and a little surprised) that San Francisco, where anything is tolerated in the name of "compassion", got its act together enough to chase the worst of the skate vandals out of town and make it no longer a "big" destination.

San Francisco should have built some top quality skate parks--in that setting, skate boarding is a legitimate sport. But I wonder how many of the kids trashing the Embarcadero would even want to skate in a park. The "outlaw" aspect of what they were doing was, I bet, a large part of the "fun".

You are right, though, the skateboarding situation has some similarities to the bicycle situation. Both can be great in the right setting and both can be destructive in the wrong setting. I wish everybody could see the distinction and do something to stop the destructive misuse of both.

[condodweller]

I'm well aware of that. I watched skate boarders from the East Bay come out of the Embarcadero BART Station and begin to destroy the new retaining walls and other features in front of the Ferry Building before they were even complete. I personally called the cops several times when I saw them. Same with the new Main Library. The city did not want nor expect to have to install those chunky metal blocks--they are an extra expense and ugly--but without them the place would have been a wreck.

What makes me proud is beautiful new landscaping and architecture, not lawless teens doing what some teens have always done: wrecking things built by adults. Oh yes, and I'm proud (and a little surprised) that San Francisco, where anything is tolerated in the name of "compassion", got its act together enough to chase the worst of the skate vandals out of town and make it no longer a "big" destination.

San Francisco should have built some top quality skate parks--in that setting, skate boarding is a legitimate sport. But I wonder how many of the kids trashing the Embarcadero would even want to skate in a park. The "outlaw" aspect of what they were doing was, I bet, a large part of the "fun".

You are right, though, the skateboarding situation has some similarities to the bicycle situation. Both can be great in the right setting and both can be destructive in the wrong setting. I wish everybody could see the distinction and do something to stop the destructive misuse of both.

I agree with everything you've said, and then some. My condo association spent a serious amount of money upgrading our building, including an open plaza adjacent to the sidewalk. The skateboarders were all over it as soon as the concrete dried. It amounts to vandalism, pure and simple.

On the other hand, a few years back I got a chuckle out of the fact that the terrorist-proofing mound in front of the Golden Gate Ave. entrance to the Federal Building turned out to be a mecca for skateboarders (until the metal obstacles were installed) -- who couldn't have seen that one coming! :D

I will say that much for bicyclists -- at least they're not out there damaging planters and staircases!

[BTinSF]

Eventually, one of these confrontations is going to result in serious injury, possibly intentional, when the bicyclists pick on the wrong driver--one angry enough and prepared to fight back. And regardless of how each incident happens, it seems clear to me they wouldn't happen if bicyclists scrupulously obeyed the law and did not provoke confrontations. But provoking confrontations seems to be what Critical Mass has gotten to be about.

Cyclist, motorists clash in Berkeley Critical Mass
Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, May 12, 2007

(05-12) 16:56 PDT BERKELEY -- An angry confrontation erupted during Friday night's Critical Mass bike ride in Berkeley when cyclists accused a motorist of trying to run them over, a participant who videotaped part of the fracas said today.

But police said Saturday participants of the monthly bike ride threw their bicycles in front of the motorist to impede him.

The incident, similar to an altercation during a Critical Mass in San Francisco in March, occurred at about 8 p.m. as dozens of cyclists rode through the intersection of The Alameda and Monterey Avenue in North Berkeley, said bicycle activist Jason Meggs.

A 72-year-old man driving the Chevrolet minivan and his 70-year-old wife were surrounded by bicyclists who rocked their vehicle, police said, adding that two witnesses told them that three riders threw their bicycles in front of the minivan to block its path.

Tempers flared on both sides and the minivan's windshield was shattered and a wiper bent, but Berkeley police did not make any arrests, said Sgt. Mary Kusmiss, department spokeswoman.

"There's nothing to suggest in the report or documentation thus far that the driver intentionally or had an intent to hit anybody," she said. "The driver and his wife, both of them were very confused and, in their words, feared for their safety being encircled by this group, who they characterized as being quite aggressive and angry."

But Meggs disputed that account, saying the man drove toward the cyclists, prompting the confrontation.

On a video of the incident filmed by Meggs, cyclists are seen trying to remove three bicycles stuck beneath the right front tire of the van.

"Everybody, back away!" one person is heard shouting. Cyclists are seen and heard pounding on the vehicle's hood and windows.

"What the f-? What's your f- problem?" one cyclist demands of the driver, who is inside the vehicle with the windows closed.

At one point, the man's wife opens her door. "How dare you be so violent?" someone is heard asking her. "Are you people drunk?"

The woman says something that can't be heard, prompting a man to ask her, "Guess who started it? Guess who did it?"

"You're on top of three bikes!" a bicyclist tells the driver, urging him to move.

"I'm trying to -- my wife has the door open!" the driver replies.

A cyclist is heard telling the driver, "You injured somebody. Do not leave yet."

Firefighters at a nearby Berkeley fire station heard the commotion and summoned police because it appeared that "an angry crowd was surrounding a minivan," Kusmiss said.

One lieutenant, two sergeants and 14 officers responded, Kusmiss said, and police filed an 18-page report.

Meggs said two cyclists were injured but they declined medical attention.

He said the cyclists had a green light when they entered the intersection, but he did not know if the light had changed before they'd all made it across the street.

Meggs said he regretted the damage to the vehicle and insisted that he wasn't sure how it occurred. Nevertheless, he said hitting the vehicle is a "relatively innocuous thing to do when you're freaking out and thinking you're about to be killed."

Meggs said police blamed the bicyclists for instigating the confrontation, a charge he denied. The Berkeley Critical Mass has been a peaceful event for more than 14 years, he said.

The incident evoked comparisons to a March 30 confrontation during the Critical Mass ride in San Francisco.

In that case, Susan Ferrando of Redwood City said she found herself in the middle of a group of bicyclists in Japantown and tried to drive through them. Hundreds of bicyclists surrounded her minivan with children inside, she said, pounding on it and riding in circles around it. Eventually, she said, someone used a bicycle to smash the rear window.

Some bicyclists, however, say that Ferrando accelerated recklessly, hit a rider, knocked him to the ground and kept driving until the bicyclists surrounded her minivan. Ferrando has denied hitting a bicycle. Police said the bicyclist declined medical assistance. No charges were filed in the incident.

A portion of the video shot during the incident Friday night in Berkeley can be seen at http://bclu.org/20070511.

E-mail Henry K. Lee at hlee@sfchronicle.com.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/12/BAGIEPQ4IU69.DTL

[condodweller]

:previous: That video, despite being as self serving as possible on the part of the cyclists, basically shows that they created the situation by surrounding an elderly man, with handicapped placards no less, and confusing the hell out of him until he rolled forward a couple of inches. All of the accusations, violence and profanity are coming from the bicyclists, not the driver or his wife (who seems amazingly calm in the face of such abuse). The guy who really should be arrested is the idiot who bicycles his two infants through a crowded city in that rolling death trap tent/carriage thing. Talk about child endangerment! The slightest rear-end incident could crush them to death.

But I digress. You are right that eventually this sort of thing will get worse. Sooner or later the bicycle-rights crowd is going to find itself face to face with one or more gun-rights people. Which, of course is probably why they pick on minivan drivers, rather than guys in pickup trucks or on Harleys... :rolleyes:

[zaphod]

wow this is getting crazy.


if someone ever messes with me when I go on my bike somewhere, I think i'll tell them "watch out, or i'll go critical mass on your ass"

:haha:

[rs913]

if someone ever messes with me when I go on my bike somewhere, I think i'll tell them "watch out, or i'll go critical mass on your ass"

You'll need a Batsignal-like device to call the Critical Mass mob to rally to your defense...

These Critical Mass people are shooting themselves in the foot. After these recent incidents, nobody will ever again believe that the motorists are at fault in these motorist/CriticalAss run-ins.

[quashlo]

I don't know who's at fault, although I don't see how the video is supposed to make me sympathize one bit with the bicyclists... But I love the idiot father who brought his two kids to the clown show... You're flat-out stupid bringing young children into a situation which has this much potential for violence. :rolleyes:

[BTinSF]

^^^The police say the bicyclists laid their bikes down in front of him to "impede" him and he rolled over them. That sure is the way it looks to me on the film because when it starts he isn't on the bikes laying on the pavement but then he does slightly roll forward onto them. But it doesn't explain how anyone would have been injured as the cyclists claim.

I'm guessing that, as in San Francisco, he more or less confusedly drove into the crowd of cyclists, possibly bumping one of two (not bad enough to really hurt them or he would have been charged) and, rather than let him pass, they pulled the stunt to stop him.

The sad thing is the dazed look on the old lady's face. But the guy sure looks like Dick Cheney--could it be?

[CHapp]

Naw. He'd avoid Berkeley like the plague.

[Reminiscence]

Yet another unprovoked attack by these radical cyclists. These guys take too much upon themselves and think they are above the law. I dont know about the driver in this video, but I actually think his reaction was soft to mild, I know I would be furious. And that guy with the kids, *sigh*, what was he thinking? I'm not surprised no arrests were made, or they'd probably still be out there as I'm typing this.

Dick Cheney in Berkeley? Unless the Earth suddently started rotating backwards, I dont see it happening even in my lifetime.

[CHapp]

OK, here's the film clip (www.bclu.org/20070511) of the incident in Berkeley for all to see.

Doesn't look to me like a deliberate (or even accidental) attack on the bicyclists on the part of the old couple but rather like Let's create an incident on the part of the bike riders. It seems to me like those bikes were deliberately placed in front of and beneath the van.

[sf_eddo]

People will see what they want to see. It seems forumers already sway to the side of cars (and against the bike) and so thats what they infer from the video.

I've actually done Critical Mass in Berkeley before and there has never been one iota of any incident from any of the passengers, participants, drivers, pedestrians, anything back when I did it. It's much more friendly and jovial of an atmosphere than its counterpart in SF (which I've never done). I recognized some of the people in the video - they're not the type to throw bikes under a car in order to prove a point. They're grad students who don't have any money and probably can't afford another thousand dollar bike.

[Ronin]

I'm well aware of that. I watched skate boarders from the East Bay come out of the Embarcadero BART Station and begin to destroy the new retaining walls and other features in front of the Ferry Building before they were even complete.

I don't see how mentioning the fact of where they are from is even relevant (only to you, it is), since the main issue is about the kids destroying the property. Besides, how do you know where they rode the Bart from? Maybe they came out from Mission or Millbrae?

[BTinSF]

^^^As a San Francisco taxpayer and someone who lives here and cares about the city, it does bother me if out-of-town kids come into town to vandalize the place because trashing stuff in San Francisco is more fun (or whatever) than trashing stuff back in the burbs.

I suppose I don't know for sure where they come from when they come out of Embarcadero Station, but as you or somebody said earlier, San Francisco had (at the time I was speaking about) a reputation that drew boarders not only from around the Bay Area but from around the country. If we've lost it, I'm relieved.

Back on the subject of bikes and their riders, KGO did a story tonight that they summarized (at http://iteamblog.abc7news.com/2007/05/bikes_vs_cars_c.html ) as follows:

Bikes vs. Cars: Cyclists Cause More Accidents

It’s been a long-running dispute around the Bay Area. Bicyclists complain that drivers don’t share the road; drivers complain that bicyclists ignore traffic laws and get in the way. The issues fuel the monthly Critical Mass rides in San Francisco and in cities across the country, and tensions are rising after recent clashes here. So, “we wanted to get to the cold, hard facts” as we reported tonight at 11pm.

The latest CHP data on car-bike collisions that resulted in injury or death shows, most often, the cyclist is at fault. Take a look for yourself at the CHP statistics covering more than 11-thousand accidents around the bay during the past five years. Sixty percent of the time, the cyclist caused the crash. The most common violations that led to accidents were riding on the wrong side of the road, refusing to yield to an automobile's right of way, unsafe speed and ignoring traffic signals and signs. Cyclists who caused collisions were nearly three times more likely to be under the influence of alcohol, compared to drivers who caused accidents.

We’re also posting a 2001 study from the Bicycle Coalition, which accuses officers of failing to file reports on behalf of bicyclists. The Coalition's Executive Director Leah Shahum says that's often still the case.

[Reminiscence]

That study pretty much backs up what I've been seeing for years now. I dont know exactly what it is, but I feel that people who use bicycles think the traffic laws of the road dont apply for them. I see them running stop signs, red lights, and swerving through the road like there are no cars.

[POLA]

any solutions? how about a city of ped bridges and elevated roads? that sound good?

[Reminiscence]

Hmmm ... that sounds like a nice idea. But, oh wait, this is San Francisco we're talking about here, that shall cost billions and therefore be a worse problem than our current problem. :rolleyes:

This is something that should not need a solution, we should all just obey the rules of the road. Thats not hard, and it will even save us money.

[condodweller]

That study pretty much backs up what I've been seeing for years now. I dont know exactly what it is, but I feel that people who use bicycles think the traffic laws of the road dont apply for them. I see them running stop signs, red lights, and swerving through the road like there are no cars.

Not to mention that they want rights to the sidewalk as well as the road. I think I'm even more annoyed by bicyclists when I'm a pedestrian downtown, than when I'm driving -- you have to deal with them swerving between people on sidewalks, and then running red lights when you're trying to cross the street. I say, make them get licenses and insurance, and punish traffic violations by citation. If they want equal rights to the road, they need to respect the rules.

[rs913]

There are quite a few people who ride their bikes on the sidewalk in Berkeley too. Sometimes they'll even ring their bells to tell you to get out of the way like they think you're legally supposed to! I feel bad about even walking my bike on a reasonably busy sidewalk because of the space it takes up, so to me, these people have some serious cojones.

Isn't there a section of the CA driver's handbook for bicyclists? Even if they weren't required to get licenses and carry insurance, they should at the very least be held legally responsible by police for the info in that section.

[BTinSF]

In SF (I don't know about Berkeley), riding a bike on the sidewalk is illegal.

However, as I have repeatedly said, in 26 years of living in SF, I can recall seeing a city cop enforce a traffic law once (I saw a cop nail somebody for making an illegal left turn onto Market from Castro going south once). The odds of getting busted for riding on the sidewalk are zero.

[citizensf]

Bikes on sidewalks really get my goat...

I was walking with my two (small) children in Golden Gate Park today. As I was exiting Strybing Arboretum (the entrance on MLK nearest the Japanese Tea Garden), two bikers careened right in front of me almost hitting me and the kids. The one guy yelled back at me in a condescending tone "Please watch where you're going sir!" and then proceeded to wheel into the music concourse bike lane...going in the opposite direction of traffic (helmetless, of course).

Of course, from where I was stopped in my tracks I could see not one, but THREE, large signs painted on the ground saying "No Bicycles, No Skating". I guess he conveniently failed to take notice.

The only real blemish on an otherwise beautiful day. I'm not against bikers in general, just the oblivious ones that run you down on footpaths where they don't belong...

[Reminiscence]

Not to mention that they want rights to the sidewalk as well as the road. I think I'm even more annoyed by bicyclists when I'm a pedestrian downtown, than when I'm driving -- you have to deal with them swerving between people on sidewalks, and then running red lights when you're trying to cross the street. I say, make them get licenses and insurance, and punish traffic violations by citation. If they want equal rights to the road, they need to respect the rules.

Rights on the sidewalk is something I would never back. Road is where they belong due to the relativly high speed that they are capable of. These speeding bicycles on the sidewalks really irritate me.

I thought about making it tougher to ride a bike in the city, but I'll have to disagree with the insurance and licence proposal not because its a bad idea, but because the city would never back it. I can already see the massive revolt by bicyclist when it becomes a hassle to ride a bike. Since its an ideal goal to reduce the number of cars from the road, bicycles are something thats always