# To the Critical Mass idiots: Watch where you're going! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 31, 2009, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834 "2009-01-31T04:35:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/41 "2009-02-06T17:31:47Z")
Sounds like CM, or at least part of it, is emulating PeTA’s tactics. Also sounds like CM, or at least part of it, needs a clue that emulating PeTA’s tactics is not a good idea. ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/42 "2009-02-06T17:38:21Z")
> [@not\_alice](#): > > Just stay within the lines, don’t make any sudden moves In the incident that inspired the OP, if I had stayed within the lines and not made any sudden moves, I would have about four bicyclists slam into me head-on. There were no other cars around, so I was able to swerve into the other lane to evade them. If there had been a car staying within the lines and not making any sudden moves in the lane to my right, I wouldn’t have had anywhere to go and the situation wouldn’t have been pretty. Sorry, but you _don’t_ get to violate the social contract, flout reasonable laws, deliberately risk others’ well-being, and then claim to be taking the moral high road. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/43 "2009-02-06T17:47:14Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > Sounds like CM, or at least part of it, is emulating PeTA’s tactics. Also sounds like CM, or at least part of it, needs a clue that emulating PeTA’s tactics is not a good idea. PETA is exactly what I think of with these guys. So utterly convinced of the certainty of their position, and equally unconvinced of the necessity to actually convince anyone else of it. ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/44 "2009-02-06T17:55:12Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Where did I equate them? > > I asked IF you thought homeless people should have police protection. It appears you do. It is therefore apparent that you believe in some circumstances whether a person pays for a government service is not relevant to whether they receive it. > > The next stage is determining where you draw the line. Should people who don’t pay taxes be allowed to have their children educated, for example? I would think you would probably say yes. I would certainly hope so… How about using public libraries? > > My point is that whining about there not being a bike tax, so they shouldn’t be on the roads isn’t such a winning argument as you seem to think it is. > > As an aside, I would be very surprised to find out that the Minnesota road system is paid for in entirety out of auto taxes, that the money raised in such taxes is completely protected from other uses, that the road system makes no use of other forms of government funding, that it does not take advantage of the borrowing capacity of state and local government (thereby increasing the debt costs for all other projects), and, most importantly, even if this was the case today, that a net present value of all the investment in the past by public money into the road system that was not paid for by automobile taxes (including the value of the land on which the roads were built) has been repaid to the general fund out of automobile taxes and those taxes alone. It could be the case, but I doubt it. Even if it is, it is still a bloody stupid argument to make in the arena of provision of government services. You keep trying to make in complicated and to connect two different things. How about this…killing babies is wrong, correct? Well, how about if the baby is in extreme pain, being burned alive but you can’t save it. It WILL die and in horrible pain…so you ARE willing to kill babies! Well..where do you draw the line then huh huh huh? Taxes being used to educate other people’s children…Not exactly fair…but I can buy some of the arguments for it so sure. Education is important and can have a huge impact on someones life. Public libraries…sure…I would support it. Not as important maybe as education in affecting quality of life…but voters vote for it so it’s a good thing. Being able to ride a bike taking up a lane of traffic on a busy highway even though autos pay all the tax for the roads? No. This is not a needed thing for the bicyclist…so still no. In MN, autos DO pay for all road expenses…and also more. Money is actually taken out of auto taxes to pay for other things. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/45 "2009-02-06T17:57:56Z")
I am not connecting two different things. I wanted to see where you think people who don’t pay taxes should be entitled to government services. Does the MN road funding policy cover all of the things I asked about? ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/46 "2009-02-06T18:06:27Z")
> [@villa](#): > > I am not connecting two different things. I wanted to see where you think people who don’t pay taxes should be entitled to government services. > > Does the MN road funding policy cover all of the things I asked about? Last year there was a proposition to divert auto taxes even more to public transit. Both sides argued plenty over it. The one thing they didn’t argue about is that the cost of the road system in the budget \< amount raised by taxing autos. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/47 "2009-02-06T18:20:16Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Last year there was a proposition to divert auto taxes even more to public transit. Both sides argued plenty over it. The one thing they didn’t argue about is that the cost of the road system in the budget \< amount raised by taxing autos. So the current upkeep cost is less than the amount raised in taxes. That’s a fundamentally different thing to the concept that auto taxes pay and have paid for the entire road system. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/48 "2009-02-06T18:20:33Z")
> [@Hunter\_Hawk](#): > > Do you have information contrary to what is posted [here](http://www.myballard.com/2009/02/04/accident-at-65th-st-24th-ave/), for example? Some witnesses suggest something different from the version you posted, this is the post I saw yesterday: > **[More Details On This Morning's Bike Accident](https://www.thestranger.com/blogs/2009/02/04/1066098/more_details_on_this_morning_s)** > > It appears the cyclist involved in a collision with a van in Ballard earlier this morning was seriously injured. According to Seattle Fire Department spokeswoman Dana Vander Houwen, medics performed CPR on a 39-year-old man at the scene, who was... I have never ridden in Seattle, but I have ridden in Baltimore, San Jose, San Francisco among many other places urban, suburban and rural. Regardless of the details of this particular accident, the fact remains that drivers often don’t think that bike are worth looking for, they don’t realize the danger they present to riders, they don’t know the rules of the road that a cyclist is entitled to, and worse. Making drivers aware of their own shortcomings is the purpose of CM. When drivers demonstrate none of the above is true anymore, I am sure CM will fade away because drivers and bikes will already be in happy equilibrium. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/49 "2009-02-06T18:21:49Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > I don’t know about where you live, but in MN roads are paid entirely by taxing automobiles. They paid for the roads so they do ‘own’ it. Someone that only rides a bike and doesn’t own a car pays $0.00 for the roads. Horseshit. This line gets thrown out all the time and it simply is not true. Local roads are paid mostly for by general taxes, usually property tax. State and Federal highways are partially funded by user fees, but not entirely. Read ‘Whose Roads’ sometime. It was written in regards to Canada, but if anything the situation is exacerbated in the US even more. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/50 "2009-02-06T18:31:25Z")
> [@Time\_Stranger](#): > > It is not going to make the cars think, “Hey! I should start using my signals to not hit bikes!” or suddenly give them an epiphany of safer driving. You don’t know that. There are a lot of drivers out there, I am sure many have been positive affected. I recall one time in Baltimore I was riding down a large hill in downtown area in traffic. St Paul Street, Probably around Baltimore st for those in the area. I was cut off by a driver mindlessly making a right turn as squeezing me to the right. I slapped her right rear fender HARD. She slowed down at the sound, saw me in the mirror, and then stopped. She was in tears shaking, she was sure she had run me over. Typical, she said she never saw me, didn’t look,. blah blah blah. But she at least was the definition of distraught and relieved, and I could tell she was never going to have that happen again. > [@](#): > > Purposely being a dick to drivers is not going to help anything. Purposely or non-purposely being a dick to bikes is not helping anything either. Which happens 717 of the 720 hours in a month? > [@](#): > > Riding a bike on streets is dangerous enough without being needlessly inflammatory to people driving metal machines that can smash you in an instant. As an experienced rider, you well know that there is an element of the driver population that is clueless, as the driver I just mentioned, and those who actively believe bikes should not be on the road. Neither is going to have their positions changed without a hard experience, and there are large groups of each set. I prefer the experience by non-injurious and slightly inconvenient, as in CM or the incident I described. They work. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Scrappy\_Hero\_Pup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ea5d25/32.png) [@Happy\_Scrappy\_Hero\_Pup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Scrappy_Hero_Pup)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/51 "2009-02-06T18:32:49Z")
From your very own source, the oh-so-reputable “Slog:” > [@](#): > > \*\*My guess is…\*\*that the van moved right in order to execute a u-turn to the left, and didn’t see the bike; That’s not _some_ witnesses, but _a_ witness who saw the accident itself and GUESSED about the antecedents. [QUOTE= not\_alice] Regardless of the details of this particular accident, the fact remains that drivers often don’t think that bike are worth looking for, they don’t realize the danger they present to riders, they don’t know the rules of the road that a cyclist is entitled to, and worse. [/QUOTE] Not the most effective technique: “my source is debunked, but regardless of that, my opinion is fact.” Regardless of the details of your particular dog in this fight, the fact remains that some bikers think that because they are vulnerable, the world is required to indulge their non-signaling, their traveling below minimum speed, their aggressive and unannounced passing techniques, and their general assholery about disobeying traffic laws when it’s more convenient for them, and then claiming their protection if you get within their zone of comfort, which is entirely arbitrary and particular to each moron. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/52 "2009-02-06T18:34:01Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > In MN, autos DO pay for all road expenses…and also more. Money is actually taken out of auto taxes to pay for other things. Funny, [this](http://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200617.pdf) does not agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/53 "2009-02-06T18:34:03Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Hopefully when you get dusted, you won’t be hurt too bad. When you deliberately piss off people you cannot expect all of them to react with restraint. If you are pissed off when a bike takes the lane legally then you don’t deserve to have a license. Do you say the same thing when a driver of another car or truck pisses you off, or are you just a bully because your vehicle is bigger? ---
**Author:** ![fachverwirrt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/94ad74/32.png) [@fachverwirrt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fachverwirrt)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/54 "2009-02-06T18:38:38Z")
The “tax” argument is a non-starter. What about teenagers borrowing their parents cars? They didn’t pay any taxes, so they shouldn’t be on the road. More importantly, I’m reasonably certain that the majority of cyclists also own and drive cars, and therefore are in fact paying all associated taxes. So they do, by that argument, “own” the road. Why would their rights to it disappear simply because they are using a different conveyance from that which they paid taxes on? Further, I think we can probably agree that cars cause vastly more wear on the road than bicycles, so they should certainly bear far more of the tax burden. For the record, I haven’t been on a bicycle in probably ten years. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/55 "2009-02-06T18:39:39Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Are you seriously comparing human life with whether bikes should be allowed to take up lanes of a busy highway? If you seriously believe that your State’s vehicle code should be changed so that bikes are not allowed except perhaps under circumstances you prefer, then I suggest you write a letter to you representatives in the Legislature. I would love to see a copy of it and any response you get. It is your right to seek to change the laws you don’t like. I predict you won’t get far if you even can compose a letter, but it is sure your right to try. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/56 "2009-02-06T18:45:07Z")
> [@Hunter\_Hawk](#): > > In the incident that inspired the OP, if I had stayed within the lines and not made any sudden moves, I would have about four bicyclists slam into me head-on. There were no other cars around, so I was able to swerve into the other lane to evade them. If there had been a car staying within the lines and not making any sudden moves in the lane to my right, I wouldn’t have had anywhere to go and the situation wouldn’t have been pretty. > Sorry, but you _don’t_ get to violate the social contract, flout reasonable laws, deliberately risk others’ well-being, and then claim to be taking the moral high road. So in Post 42 you suddenly decide to start to describe what got you upset. Not enough detail to go on here, but I ma sure by post 84 we might get the next installment. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/57 "2009-02-06T18:49:55Z")
> [@not\_alice](#): > > So in Post 42 you suddenly decide to start to describe what got you upset. > > Not enough detail to go on here, but I ma sure by post 84 we might get the next installment. The OP actually said: [QUOTE=Hunter Hawk] suddenly pulling out of your lane and deciding to play chicken with me on a rain-slick street is a dumbass thing to do [/QUOTE] I think that was a good start at describing what got him upset. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/58 "2009-02-06T18:53:24Z")
> [@Happy\_Scrappy\_Hero\_Pup](#): > > From your very own source, the oh-so-reputable “Slog:” > > That’s not _some_ witnesses, but _a_ witness who saw the accident itself and GUESSED about the antecedents. And your source is somehow more accurate at this stage of the investigation, or that regardless of the particulars of THIS accident, that cyclists don’t barely escape clueless drivers every single day and never make the news? The only time this happens is when it makes the news? Oh if that were only so! > [@](#): > > Regardless of the details of your particular dog in this fight, the fact remains that some bikers think that because they are vulnerable, the world is required to indulge their non-signaling, their traveling below minimum speed, their aggressive and unannounced passing techniques, and their general assholery about disobeying traffic laws when it’s more convenient for them, and then claiming their protection if you get within their zone of comfort, which is entirely arbitrary and particular to each moron. yes, you are required to do all that. I am sure it is your State’s vehicle code, just as it is in mine. cyclists have to put up with the same assholery too, that is the entire point Two cars meet and one is an asshole, they get a fender bender, the same thing happens when the car is an asshole, bodies are broken and lives are lost. Just keep your eyes out. You already know from experience that both cars and cyclists (and pedestrians for that matter!) can appear at the most unexpected times and places. Drive like you know that all the time, and you will be fine. That is all we ask. It is tantamount to nothing more then asking you to obey the laws and vehicle code of your state. Is that too much to ask? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/59 "2009-02-06T18:59:49Z")
> [@not\_alice](#): > > You don’t know that. There are a lot of drivers out there, I am sure many have been positive affected. Critical Mass doesn’t make me drive more safely: I’m already a safe driver. What Critical Mass does is make me more sympathetic to the idea that bikes shouldn’t be allowed on the same roads as cars at all. And I’m willing to bet that every time Critical Mass shuts down traffic in the middle of rush hour, and curses out drivers who haven’t actually done anything except be in a car, more and more people are moved to the same position. So, by all means, keep having your Critical Mass rallies. Like you said, soon enough it will lead to a resolution of the problem. Just don’t be surprised if it’s not the one you want. Oh, and you really should consider wearing a helmet when you ride. Although judging by your posts here, I suppose it’s a bit late for that advice to be really effective. ---
**Author:** ![not\_alice](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_alice/32/7283_2.png) [@not\_alice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_alice)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834/60 "2009-02-06T18:59:57Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > The OP actually said: > > I think that was a good start at describing what got him upset. Why not do that in the OP though instead of drolling out details as convenient? because it seems in the OP he is upset about something that supposedly happened (and may very well have happened) at CM. But I have seen this thread a zillion times on a zillion forums before. But since then his true ire is revealed - he doesn’t think bikes should be on the road because they annoy him, they slow him down, they are hard to spot (by him, I never seem to have that problem when I drive, and yes I see the same foolish riders with no lights or reflectors at night, sometimes even going the wrong way, somehow I manage to see the,m, so why can’t everyone else?) It is a choice to do so - if you know you might encounter stuff that you wish you didn’t, then either don’t drive, or drive in a way that you are prepared to handle the encounter. Your choice. But don’t come on here complaining about CM when your real beef is the consequences of your own choice to not be aware of and/or follow the rules of the road as a driver, that’s what I say to the OP. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-the-critical-mass-idiots-watch-where-youre-going/483834.md?page=4)