Why is it OK to ram cyclists but not other drivers?

BrianW gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

On 31 Oct, 08:14, Doug wrote:
On 30 Oct, 09:46, calum wrote: On Oct 28, 5:29Â*pm,
Doug wrote:

calum wrote:
From one cyclist to another, answer the question straight: given
that you are cognisant of CM's contribution to the congestion
when you start your ride, why do you add to it?
Doug wrote:
For the same reason that every motorist who starts their drive
knows they are going to contribute to congestion.

So, in spite of your air of moral and environmental superiority, you
are no better than the very motorists you so despise? Nice one.

You are missing the point, again. Congestion is a natural consequence
of too many road users massing together. So, everyone who wants to use
roads possibly contributes to congestion at some time or other.
Therefore, the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are hypocrites
for accusing CM of contributing to congestion, which only does so once
a month while the motorists do so every day.

So, why should cyclists be denied the use of roads for causing
congestion

They are not. I certainly have no problem with cyclists using the roads
for bona fide reasons, even if this contributes to congestion (and as
you know, I am a cyclist myself).

I do have a problem with cyclists setting out with the *aim* of causing
congestion. Just as I would have a problem with motorists doing the
same. I also have a problem with cyclists blatantly ignoring traffic
laws. Just as I have a problem with motorists blatantly ignoring
traffic laws.

As you signature says, cyclists are traffic. I believe they should obey
the law accordingly.

We're back to two kinds of hypocrisy, aren't we?

There's the kind where Duhg is a hypocrite because he condemns others for
doing what he himself does, then there's the kind where Duhg accuses
others of being hypocrites for doing what Duhg condemns.

On Oct 31, 8:14*am, Doug wrote:

Doug wrote:
For the same reason that every motorist who starts their drive knows
they are going to contribute to congestion.

So, in spite of your air of moral and environmental superiority, you
are no better than the very motorists you so despise?
Nice one.


You are missing the point, again.

You've never had a point Doug.

... the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are hypocrites
for accusing CM of contributing to congestion, which only does so once
a month while the motorists do so every day.

You still don't have a point.

You can't justify your wrongdoing by pointing at another who did it
first or does it more than you. At least not once you've left primary
school.

And most road users are using the road network to get to work, return
home, deliver goods, go out of an evening, travel to the airport,
travel to park & ride stations, supermarkets, funerals, weddings, not
aimlessly parade the busiest streets of the city at rush hour and
beyond. Unlike you on your CM rides.

So, why should cyclists be denied the use of roads for causing
congestion ...

Which roads am I denied the use of? (I'm a cyclist, remember?)

...while motorists are allowed to continue to do so in much
greater numbers and with much greater congestion and pollution?

Still with the primary school arguments.

By your own admission, CM rides cause congestion: that in turn
increases pollution.
How can you sleep at night?

BTW, my personal viewpoint is that congestion is the main limitation
on excessive and ever increasing harmful mobility, aka hypermobility,
and for that very reason may actually be desirable in the long term.
So maybe CM is doing everyone a favour.

Congestion is bad, motorists do it all the time, it limits
hypermobility so ... congestion is good. EH?!

Calum

On 31 Oct, 10:29, BrianW wrote:
On 31 Oct, 08:14, Doug wrote:



On 30 Oct, 09:46, calum wrote: On Oct 28, 5:29*pm, Doug wrote:

calum wrote:
From one cyclist to another, answer the question straight:
given that you are cognisant of CM's contribution to the
congestion when you start your ride, why do you add to it?
Doug wrote:
For the same reason that every motorist who starts their drive knows
they are going to contribute to congestion.

So, in spite of your air of moral and environmental superiority, you
are no better than the very motorists you so despise?
Nice one.

You are missing the point, again. Congestion is a natural consequence
of too many road users massing together. So, everyone who wants to use
roads possibly contributes to congestion at some time or other.
Therefore, the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are hypocrites
for accusing CM of contributing to congestion, which only does so once
a month while the motorists do so every day.

So, why should cyclists be denied the use of roads for causing
congestion

They are not. *I certainly have no problem with cyclists using the
roads for bona fide reasons, even if this contributes to congestion
(and as you know, I am a cyclist myself).

But the previous poster implied I should not set off on my bike if I
thought I might contribute to congestion.

I do have a problem with cyclists setting out with the *aim* of
causing congestion.

As I have frequently pointed out, CM does not have a single aim. Many
CM participants do not want to contribute to congestion.

*Just as I would have a problem with motorists
doing the same. *I also have a problem with cyclists blatantly
ignoring traffic laws. *Just as I have a problem with motorists
blatantly ignoring traffic laws.

As you signature says, cyclists are traffic. *I believe they should
obey the law accordingly.

But the problem is the police want to treat it as a procession and
make it go through red lights and ignore the rights of pedestrians,
etc. Police compel CM riders to break traffic laws, presumably to
speed it through and cause a minimum of inconvenience to other road
users.

If CM is to stop at every red traffic light, and I personally don't
have a problem with this, it will delay the ride, cause splintering
and create much more congestion. Splintering CM into several groups
could be fun and much more difficult to police. Similarly, if CM does
not cork side streets cars will push in and become blocked within the
ride and tempted to impatiently ram riders, instead of waiting a few
minutes for CM to pass.

--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"We aren't blocking traffic, we are traffic".

On 31 Oct, 11:40, Doug wrote:
On 31 Oct, 10:29, BrianW wrote:



On 31 Oct, 08:14, Doug wrote:

On 30 Oct, 09:46, calum wrote: On Oct 28, 5:29*pm, Doug wrote:

calum wrote:
From one cyclist to another, answer the question straight:
given that you are cognisant of CM's contribution to the
congestion when you start your ride, why do you add to it?
Doug wrote:
For the same reason that every motorist who starts their drive knows
they are going to contribute to congestion.

So, in spite of your air of moral and environmental superiority, you
are no better than the very motorists you so despise?
Nice one.

You are missing the point, again. Congestion is a natural consequence
of too many road users massing together. So, everyone who wants to use
roads possibly contributes to congestion at some time or other.
Therefore, the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are hypocrites
for accusing CM of contributing to congestion, which only does so once
a month while the motorists do so every day.

So, why should cyclists be denied the use of roads for causing
congestion

They are not. *I certainly have no problem with cyclists using the
roads for bona fide reasons, even if this contributes to congestion
(and as you know, I am a cyclist myself).

But the previous poster implied I should not set off on my bike if I
thought I might contribute to congestion.

I do have a problem with cyclists setting out with the *aim* of
causing congestion.

As I have frequently pointed out, CM does not have a single aim. Many
CM participants do not want to contribute to congestion.

"Corking", and stopping in the middle of the road to lift your bike in
the air, is a deliberate act to cause congestion.

*Just as I would have a problem with motorists
doing the same. *I also have a problem with cyclists blatantly
ignoring traffic laws. *Just as I have a problem with motorists
blatantly ignoring traffic laws.

As you signature says, cyclists are traffic. *I believe they should
obey the law accordingly.

But the problem is the police want to treat it as a procession and
make it go through red lights and ignore the rights of pedestrians,
etc. Police compel CM riders to break traffic laws, presumably to
speed it through and cause a minimum of inconvenience to other road
users.

Uhuh. And the police force CMers to cork and stop in the middle of
the road to protest, do they?

If CM is to stop at every red traffic light, and I personally don't
have a problem with this, it will delay the ride, cause splintering

Stopping at traffic lights delays me in my car. Would it be OK for me
to ignore them?

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

But the previous poster implied I should not set off on my bike if I
thought I might contribute to congestion.

You have, after all, condemned car drivers for setting off in their cars
when, in doing so, they may contribute to congestion.

Surely consistency requires you to comply with that yourself? Otherwise,
you're at great risk of hypocrisy.

As I have frequently pointed out, CM does not have a single aim. Many CM
participants do not want to contribute to congestion.

Fine. So - according to your maxim - they'd better not attend, then.

As you signature says, cyclists are traffic. Â*I believe they should
obey the law accordingly.

But the problem is the police want to treat it as a procession and make
it go through red lights and ignore the rights of pedestrians, etc.

So you keep saying.

Police compel CM riders to break traffic laws, presumably to speed it
through and cause a minimum of inconvenience to other road users.

Isn't it strange how they don't feel the need to do that to other traffic?

If CM is to stop at every red traffic light, and I personally don't have
a problem with this, it will delay the ride,

Yes, congestion often has that effect on traffic.

cause splintering and create much more congestion.

So be it. Just the same as happens with all other traffic. Of course,
since "CM" isn't anything other than a bunch of people just going in the
same direction, "splintering" can't possibly be an issue. It could only
really become an issue if CM _is_ a "procession".

Meanwhile, if you're well aware that being part of traffic at that time,
heading in that direction will create much more congestion, shouldn't you
seriously consider the wisdom of undertaking that journey via a different
route or at a different time?

Splintering CM into several groups could be fun and much more difficult
to police.

Oh, so traffic is now "fun", is it? How come this one subset of "traffic"
needs to be in one group to be policed?

Similarly, if CM does not cork side streets cars will push in and
become blocked within the ride and tempted to impatiently ram riders,
instead of waiting a few minutes for CM to pass.

I'm sure you're well aware that the issues around "corking" only become
issues when the traffic being "corked" has priority over the traffic
which is deliberately inconveniencing them. If you can't get clear of a
junction because of stationary traffic beyond it, you don't enter that
junction. Right?

Oh, wait, that'd cause "splintering" so is a bad thing...

I do wish you'd make your mind up, entertaining though your constant
weaseling, inconsistency and flip-floppery undeniably is.

BrianW gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

If CM is to stop at every red traffic light, and I personally don't
have a problem with this, it will delay the ride, cause splintering

Stopping at traffic lights delays me in my car. Would it be OK for me
to ignore them?

Depends if they're good traffic lights or bad traffic lights, I s'pose.

On 31 Oct, 11:47, BrianW wrote:
On 31 Oct, 11:40, Doug wrote:



On 31 Oct, 10:29, BrianW wrote:

On 31 Oct, 08:14, Doug wrote:

On 30 Oct, 09:46, calum wrote: On Oct 28, 5:29*pm, Doug wrote:

calum wrote:
From one cyclist to another, answer the question straight:
given that you are cognisant of CM's contribution to the
congestion when you start your ride, why do you add to it?
Doug wrote:
For the same reason that every motorist who starts their drive knows
they are going to contribute to congestion.

So, in spite of your air of moral and environmental superiority, you
are no better than the very motorists you so despise?
Nice one.

You are missing the point, again. Congestion is a natural consequence
of too many road users massing together. So, everyone who wants to use
roads possibly contributes to congestion at some time or other.
Therefore, the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are hypocrites
for accusing CM of contributing to congestion, which only does so once
a month while the motorists do so every day.

So, why should cyclists be denied the use of roads for causing
congestion

They are not. *I certainly have no problem with cyclists using the
roads for bona fide reasons, even if this contributes to congestion
(and as you know, I am a cyclist myself).

But the previous poster implied I should not set off on my bike if I
thought I might contribute to congestion.

I do have a problem with cyclists setting out with the *aim* of
causing congestion.

As I have frequently pointed out, CM does not have a single aim. Many
CM participants do not want to contribute to congestion.

"Corking", and stopping in the middle of the road to lift your bike in
the air, is a deliberate act to cause congestion.

Corking side streets isn't an act to cause congestion, quite the
reverse, and lifting a bike is.

*Just as I would have a problem with motorists
doing the same. *I also have a problem with cyclists blatantly
ignoring traffic laws. *Just as I have a problem with motorists
blatantly ignoring traffic laws.

As you signature says, cyclists are traffic. *I believe they should
obey the law accordingly.

But the problem is the police want to treat it as a procession and
make it go through red lights and ignore the rights of pedestrians,
etc. Police compel CM riders to break traffic laws, presumably to
speed it through and cause a minimum of inconvenience to other road
users.

Uhuh. *And the police force CMers to cork and stop in the middle of
the road to protest, do they?

No the police take over the corking themselves and seem to tolerate
bike lifting for a short time. You see they do treat CM as a
procession/demonstration, unfortunately.

If CM is to stop at every red traffic light, and I personally don't
have a problem with this, it will delay the ride, cause splintering

Stopping at traffic lights delays me in my car. *Would it be OK for me
to ignore them?

Only if you were in a procession and were told to do so by police. As
I said, I don't have a problem with stopping at red lights, even
though it does make CM cause greater congestion.

BTW, London CM is this evening, if you don't mind the congestion, I
mean the congestion usually caused by the mass of cars on a Friday
evening in Central London.

--
Critical Mass London
http://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk
"We aren't blocking traffic, we are traffic".

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

BTW, London CM is this evening, if you don't mind the congestion, I mean
the congestion usually caused by the mass of cars on a Friday evening in
Central London.

Sounds like your advice to not be on the roads is good advice, then,
since you'd be knowingly worsening already bad congestion.

Doug wrote:
On 31 Oct, 10:29, BrianW wrote:
On 31 Oct, 08:14, Doug wrote:



On 30 Oct, 09:46, calum wrote: On Oct 28, 5:29
pm, Doug wrote:

calum wrote:
From one cyclist to another, answer the question straight:
given that you are cognisant of CM's contribution to the
congestion when you start your ride, why do you add to it?
Doug wrote:
For the same reason that every motorist who starts their drive
knows they are going to contribute to congestion.

So, in spite of your air of moral and environmental superiority,
you are no better than the very motorists you so despise?
Nice one.

You are missing the point, again. Congestion is a natural
consequence
of too many road users massing together. So, everyone who wants to
use
roads possibly contributes to congestion at some time or other.
Therefore, the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are
hypocrites
for accusing CM of contributing to congestion, which only does so
once
a month while the motorists do so every day.

So, why should cyclists be denied the use of roads for causing
congestion

They are not. I certainly have no problem with cyclists using the
roads for bona fide reasons, even if this contributes to congestion
(and as you know, I am a cyclist myself).

But the previous poster implied I should not set off on my bike if I
thought I might contribute to congestion.

No he didn't. He object to people setting to deliberately cause congestion,
which is what you and other CMers do, isn't it Doug?

I do have a problem with cyclists setting out with the *aim* of
causing congestion.

As I have frequently pointed out, CM does not have a single aim. Many
CM participants do not want to contribute to congestion.

Then why do they participate in an activity with other people who intend to
and which they know will cause congestion?

Just as I would have a problem with motorists
doing the same. I also have a problem with cyclists blatantly
ignoring traffic laws. Just as I have a problem with motorists
blatantly ignoring traffic laws.

As you signature says, cyclists are traffic. I believe they should
obey the law accordingly.

But the problem is the police want to treat it as a procession and
make it go through red lights and ignore the rights of pedestrians,
etc. Police compel CM riders to break traffic laws, presumably to
speed it through and cause a minimum of inconvenience to other road
users.

Yes Doug, to minimise congestion. Why do you insist on going on these rodes
with the intention of causing congestion?

If CM is to stop at every red traffic light, and I personally don't
have a problem with this, it will delay the ride, cause splintering
and create much more congestion. Splintering CM into several groups
could be fun and much more difficult to police. Similarly, if CM does
not cork side streets cars will push in and become blocked within the
ride and tempted to impatiently ram riders, instead of waiting a few
minutes for CM to pass.

Evidence?

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 05:31:42 -0700 (PDT), Doug wrote:

Corking side streets isn't an act to cause congestion

"Corking" is deliberate lawbreaking designed to illegally promulgate
congestion for the selfish benefit of a minority group.

If a motorist deliberately drove past a red light and blocked a side
street to prevent cyclists from passing, you'd be leaping up and down
and screaming blue murder.

Either way, your condoning of an illegal activity for your own personal
benefit is duly noted.

--
Cheers!
Ade.