ot: the whig party sfpd protest

[Darrin Ward]

this amuses me greatly

http://www.sfexaminer.com/bicycle-group-the-wigg-party-to-stage-cycle-riding-protest-against-sfpd-bike-crackdown/

i would go but i cant because i have oncall.  :(

lurch

[Georgia Andrews]

I'm probably working at home Wednesday! I was hoping that everyone is supposed to wear a wig though.

--
-- follow: http://twitter.com/sf2g | terms: http://sf2g.com/terms.html | bike prep: http://sf2g.com/bike-prep.html | unsub: http://groups.google.com/group/sf2g
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SF2G" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Women Who Code San Francisco City Director

womenwhocode.com

[Matthew Hiller]

I don't know that I buy their contention that a steady stream of bicycles riding single file and stopping at every stop sign would noticeably affect the smooth flow of traffic on the roads.

I don't see that doing Idaho-style stops is especially dangerous for a cyclist, but it's really about one's own convenience, and seems a bit silly to pretend otherwise.

[Kurt Wallace Martin]

Bikes coming to a full stop, then rolling across an intersection at 0-4 mph while they get up to speed - very slow.

kurt

[Matthew Hiller]

Oh - just so I'm clear, it's entirely reasonable to factor cyclist convenience into legal and enforcement regimes. The Idaho stop law values cyclist convenience by declaring a judicious practice -- yielding without stopping entirely -- as reasonable and legal. Sane enforcement priorities similarly wouldn't target a rider rolling a stop at an otherwise empty intersection. Making cycling marginally more convenient should induce marginally more of it. But declaring that slavish obedience to the law will snarl traffic is, IMO, silly.

It has serious shades of the recent thing that happened in NYC where bus drivers wanted exemption from the recently passed NYC right-of-way law. (The new-ish law makes it a misdemeanor to fail to yield to a pedestrian with right of way, especially if causing injury or death, where previously it was just a violation.)

The bus drivers got ornery about this, and at a certain point in their fight for exemption from the law, they said, "Well, you asked for it. You want us to drive really safely, we're just gonna drive really safely. Watch out in Washington Heights today, youse guys. You'll see what this does to bus traffic on our routes, and our adherence to the schedule. Drive safely, for crying out loud? So there." The near universal reaction to this in the livable streets and cycling blogosphere was "oh, okay. That sounds pretty great, actually."

[Kurt Wallace Martin]

Some day we’ll have a public debate about how stupidly inefficient 4-way stops are. Shit, even Detroit is playing with roundabouts to keep cars from constantly stopping...

[John Murphy]

This is just amusing street theatre. God bless Morgan but I think sometimes he doesn't think through whether he's actually making the point he thinks he's making. I'd seriously just bring donuts to the cops and tell the fattest one - "maybe you should try the kale instead"

[Ben Kochie]

4-way?  We have almost no stop signs at all in Berlin.  Traffic lights or uncontrolled intersections are pretty much it.

The few ghost bikes I see are near traffic lights.