This was a Critical Mass event, which is why the bicyclists are taking up all of the street as a way to reclaim the streets and protest the lack of safety for riders under usual conditions. It’s not legal, but protests are never useful if they’re fully legal now, are they.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.caEnglish
    11·
    10 hours ago

    Then why did you bring up the pride parade?

    It was sarcasm… you’re comparing regular traffic rules during regular traffic to a large protest, and expecting that everyone will be following the same rules. It’s just not reality.

    Many bikers break laws about where to cross or how to handle intersections and are just ignored all the time.

    See, that’s where the problem is.

    Cyclists and pedestrians are unfairly expected to act like multi-ton vehicles. They are not, and should not, have the same rules.

    For instance, cyclists should be using the Idaho Stop (meaning: treat red lights as stop signs and stop signs as yield signs) because it’s SAFER, more efficient, and improves traffic flow.

    Pedestrians shouldn’t be forced to cross roads only at crosswalks. “Jaywalking” is some BS nonsense made up to make pedestrians look like the bad guys. People don’t need the same rules as heavy machinery travelling at 10-20x their speed.

    There are studies showing that when cyclists “break the rules”, it’s often for safety. Motorists do not, and cannot, make the same excuse.

    Do these people not know about side streets or bike paths or anything else? There are places to bike outside of traffic.

    Discrimination. Cyclists and pedestrians should not be forced to go somewhere else, because of cars.

    On the flip side, if a motorist sees thousands of cyclists taking up the street, they should detour someplace else. It’s only fair. /s

    So the only way to show people that bikers exist is by massively disrupting traffic and causing safety issues?

    Yes. As with any other protest, you have greater impact with greater numbers. This brings greater safety, too. “Disrupting traffic” is funny… does the movement of people only matter if they are in cars? What about the thousands of cyclists who were in constant motion, not creating their own congestion or being slowed down? Motorists can only dream of that kind of efficiency.

    That’s how people-first transportation infrastructure works, BTW. As a society, we should strive for this level of people-moving infrastructure.

    Or it shows the government that bikers don’t listen to traffic laws and do whatever they want.

    There is no evidence of that. On the contrary, I’ve seen local representatives join in these unplanned group rides 🤭

    See, this has been going on for 35 years and the only thing you can point at is maybe it might have possible sped up some cycling infrastructure. Maybe. Yah, that’s not a lot of progress for 35 years of this nonsense.

    Hmm. Except for the fact that cities who host these events have been getting infrastructure upgrades, often at a faster pace. It puts pressure on local governments to act. These cyclists are voters, too, and they know it.

    This is just wild… People need traffic rules. Have you ever been in a large crowded city? Do you know all the foot TRAFFIC rules? There is literally a section of code on just this. And yes, cars exist, but what do you propose to avoid needing these rules, have no cars at all? That’s absurd. Look at rural areas and tell me how that works.

    Oh man. Have you ever seen traffic rules in a crowded mall? What about at a large venue event? Have you ever been to a very busy city where cars are blocked from access to certain roads? No traffic rules for pedestrians, because pedestrians aren’t hurling by at 100km/h pushing 2000lbs of metal around.

    Traffic rules are there because of cars.

    If you look at any laws where a pedestrian could get a fine for “breaking the rules”, it’s nearly always because they are “breaking rules” designed specifically because of cars!

    No, I would prefer they don’t disrupt an entire city for some performance that has gone on for 35 years with nothing to show for it. It’s just an excuse to protest and “stick it to the drivers.”

    It sounds like you just don’t want them to be able to protest.

    Protests around the world happen all the time. Not just a few thousand people, but sometimes hundreds of thousands or more.

    Even pedestrians do the same, for the same reasons, in “Reclaim the streets” protests.

    Ok, now imagine you are late to pick up a family member from the hospital, or you’re going to miss an interview, or a million other things.

    My dude, these things happen IN REGULAR CAR TRAFFIC, on a daily basis. In fact, because of car traffic congestion, even pedestrians who have nothing to do with driving, are inconvenienced and delayed. Not fair, is it?

    There is no time/place for a protest that would work well for everyone. By their very nature, this is why they are effective.

    But I will say that emergency vehicles are never blocked by these protests, or any protest that I’ve ever witnessed. I have seen regular traffic block fire trucks, though.

    If someone hates cyclists for doing something like this they must be a bigot and racist?

    I’m saying that the same intolerance towards a minority group of cyclists often spills into other groups.

    You can hate that a protest is inconveniencing your drive home from work, but to hate a person for exercising their right to protest for better road safety is very much in the same vein as bigotry.

    You’ve decided that drivers are the enemy and so now they suddenly don’t matter at all.

    I am a driver. I have been inconvenienced by other people’s protests. I’ve never once said I’ve hated a person for protesting for their right to safety, better working conditions, equal pay, or a host of other societal problems that should be challenged.

    You can be pro-animal rights and think that what an animal rights group does is wrong.

    Absolutely. I’ve been part of animal rights protests, and have been critical of the approach that some AR groups take.

    But I don’t think the feeling of HATING a protester has ever crossed my mind at all. Unless they were a Nazi. I’m fine with hating Nazis.

    edit: grammar

    • Lightor@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      9 hours ago

      It was sarcasm… you’re comparing regular traffic rules during regular traffic to a large protest, and expecting that everyone will be following the same rules. It’s just not reality.

      You’re really close to what I’m saying. Cars don’t do this. That was what I said. Many people, yourself included said cars do this. They don’t. You can say it was sarcasm now but this didn’t’ seem sarcastic as it was your response to saying cars don’t drive through red lights like the bikes are.

      Cyclists and pedestrians are unfairly expected to act like multi-ton vehicles. They are not, and should not, have the same rules.

      They don’t have the same rules. There are tons of rules that apply only to vehicles and plenty of laws that apply only to bikes or people. I don’t know here you’re getting this concept from unless this is more sarcasm.

      Pedestrians shouldn’t be forced to cross roads only at crosswalks. “Jaywalking” is some BS nonsense made up to make pedestrians look like the bad guys.

      So cop cars, ambulances, rural areas without public transportation, they should just let people do whatever, no rules? Walk right into the road as cars do by?

      People don’t need the same rules as heavy machinery travelling at 10-20x their speed.

      They don’t… Cars don’t use cross walks to cross the road. Where are you getting this concept from? Do you use a turning single when walking? How often do you get your bike inspected for road worthiness to make sure a wheel doesn’t come off and cause an accident? Cars can’t drive on the sidewalk, I see bikes doing this… This is so baseless and wild. You’re just literally making things up.

      There are studies showing that when cyclists “break the rules”, it’s often for safety. Motorists do not, and cannot, make the same excuse.

      I’d like to see these studies. A car can break the law by swerving into an empty oncoming lane to avoid hitting a person that jumping into the road. That is a VERY valid excuse to break the rules. Why are you ignoring basic reality?

      Discrimination. Cyclists and pedestrians should not be forced to go somewhere else, because of cars.

      So bikes should be allowed on the freeways and criss-cross up and down the highway? People should be able to just walk down the middle of the highway? Do you live in reality man?

      On the flip side, if a motorist sees thousands of cyclists taking up the street, they should detour someplace else. It’s only fair. /s

      The road was made to be used by both, not just one. But we should share? So you think cars should be able to drive on bike paths too right? Otherwise it would be “discrimination.”

      Roads are built for cars to use first, especially some highways. Sorry if that upsets you but it’s reality. This idea that bikes should be allowed to just crowd a freeway or drive wherever they want without any rules and impede people, businesses, and emergency services is delusional.

      Then I asked:

      So the only way to show people that bikers exist is by massively disrupting traffic and causing safety issues?"

      And you said:

      Yes.

      You’re either a troll or you don’t live in reality. I’m done trying to talk to someone who has no problem being so extremely dishonest and delusional. If you really, truly think that the only way to show someone that biker safety issues exist is by causing massive disruption to people, businesses, and emergency services while putting lives at risk there’s no convo to be had.

      I didn’t even bother reading the rest of your comment. You don’t live in reality. You think people and cars have the same laws to follow? You think there is never a valid reason for a car to break traffic law, even to save a life? You think the only way to let people know there are bike safety issues is by putting lives in danger and disrupting emergency services?

      No, you are wrong and you a delisional. Or a troll. So hard to tell these days.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        8 hours ago

        You’re really close to what I’m saying. Cars don’t do this. That was what I said. Many people, yourself included said cars do this. They don’t.

        Well, I gave you a long list of things that car drivers are doing, and you keep pointing to the one thing that they don’t do as often.

        Fine. Yes, not all drivers are driving on the wrong side of the road. Just enough to cause over 400 deaths a year on dividend highways (these are roadways with separation between direction traffic!!!) (REPORT FROM AAA)

        The U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported over 1200 fatalities caused by wrong way drivers in 2022 alone! (SOURCE)

        With those facts out of the way, in a protest, do you expect people to only move using the right-hand side?

        They don’t have the same rules. There are tons of rules that apply only to vehicles and plenty of laws that apply only to bikes or people. I don’t know here you’re getting this concept from unless this is more sarcasm.

        Well, I live in Ontario, Canada. And “under Ontario’s Highway Traffic Act, a bicycle is considered a vehicle, just like a car or truck.” (SOURCE).

        Not sarcasm. Cyclists are expected to wait at red lights, even if the lights remain red because they require an actual large vehicle to trigger their sensors. This is discrimination.

        There are also unfair speed limits put on e-scooter and e-bike riders. Bans on using e-scooters on roads "60km/h or more). And plenty of crossings where pedestrians and cyclists must yield to vehicles, even when it should be the other way around.

        They don’t… Cars don’t use cross walks to cross the road. Where are you getting this concept from? Do you use a turning single when walking? How often do you get your bike inspected for road worthiness to make sure a wheel doesn’t come off and cause an accident? Cars can’t drive on the sidewalk, I see bikes doing this… This is so baseless and wild. You’re just literally making things up.

        Makes no sense. You are trying to apply the same rules that trucks have to a pedestrian.

        I’m saying that pedestrians are forced to follow “traffic rules” designed because of cars, not because pedestrians need them.

        Show me a functioning city where cars don’t have rules. Because there are hundreds of examples of places where thousands of pedestrians and cyclists can move about without any of the same rules.

        I’d like to see these studies. A car can break the law by swerving into an empty oncoming lane to avoid hitting a person that jumping into the road. That is a VERY valid excuse to break the rules.

        A few studies off the top of my head:

        • Marshall, Wesley E., et al. “Scofflaw Bicycling: Illegal but Rational.” Journal of Transport and Land Use, vol. 10, no. 1, 2017, pp. 805–36. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26211757. Accessed 9 June 2025.

        “Ulawful drivers and pedestrians tend to rationalize their behaviors as time saving; bicyclists similarly rationalize their illegal behaviors but were more inclined to cite increasing their own personal safety and/or saving energy.”

        “A new study from the Danish Road Directorate shows that less than 5% of cyclists break traffic laws while riding yet 66% of motorists do so when driving.”

        • Cyclists Are More Law-Abiding Than Drivers (ARTICLE)

        “In the end, the results indicated that cyclists were compliant with the law 88 percent of the time during the day and 87 percent of the time after dark. The same study determined that drivers who interacted with the study subjects complied with the law 85 percent of the time. In other words, drivers were slightly naughtier than the cyclists—even without measuring speeding or distracted driving.”

        About compliance, there are several more that show when cyclists have better infrastructure, they don’t break the rules as often, because their safety needs are being met. I don’t have a link, as it was something I remember from a while ago.

        So bikes should be allowed on the freeways and criss-cross up and down the highway? People should be able to just walk down the middle of the highway? Do you live in reality man?

        Of course not. Keep cars where cars belong. They don’t need to dominate every square inch of space.

        The road was made to be used by both, not just one. But we should share? So you think cars should be able to drive on bike paths too right? Otherwise it would be “discrimination.”

        I’ve seen cars try to get onto bike paths… honestly, if they were wider, I’m sure more drivers would try.

        Drivers already park in designated bike lanes as a matter of entitlement.

        When I say it’s discriminatory to put disproportionate rules on cyclists and pedestrians, I mean exactly that. Large, fast machines should not be sharing space with pedestrians and cyclists. I say the same about high-powered e-bikes… they don’t belong near people.

        Roads are built for cars to use first, especially some highways. Sorry if that upsets you but it’s reality. This idea that bikes should be allowed to just crowd a freeway or drive wherever they want without any rules and impede people, businesses, and emergency services is delusional.

        Yes, unfortunately, much of North America is car-centric in their design. But things are changing, like in Montreal, where some roads are being given back to pedestrians.

        Bikes don’t impede people, businesses, or emergency services. Cars do. Parked cars, cars in gridlock, cars that have crashed, and now major roadways are closed, cars not yielding to firetrucks, and especially large SUVs taking up far more space than the single occupant they are carrying.

        The amount of space that bikes and people on foot take up is minimal. If you want to move people you get them out of cars.

        If you really, truly think that the only way to show someone that biker safety issues exist is by causing massive disruption to people, businesses, and emergency services while putting lives at risk there’s no convo to be had.

        I don’t. I think it’s one way, but it’s certainly not the only way.

        Out of curiosity, do get this fired up about “massive disruption to people, businesses, and emergency services” when other events do the same? Or is it only protesting cyclists that you have a problem with?

        Like, does your blood boil when your local Santa Claus parade closes some major streets in the area? Or when a major music festival comes to town? Or the Olympics? Or… GASP… road construction to fix the damage caused by large vehicles causes significant closures?

        There are 1001 disruptions caused by human activity, celebration, and protests. Yet, you’ve got a problem with Critical Mass. Pick your battles, man.