Skip to content

Recent Comments

  1.  

    p_chazz

    No, what I am describing is a condition known in psychotherapy as transference, which is a phenomenon characterized by unconscious redirection of feelings from one person to another.

  2.  

    DrG

    No it does. You are wrong. Keep on topic.

  3.  

    DrG

    They do. Lookout my yelp reviews.

  4.  

    dat

  5.  

    DrG

    Any hundreds of kids are sexually abused by family members, and countless numbers of people are being killed through genocide in Africa.

    We’re not talking about motorists. We’re talking about bicyclists. Keep on topic!

    But to go off topic, and respond with statistic, considering the ratio of cars to bicyclists on the roads, the number of accidents per motorist might actually be less than the number per bicyclist.

  6.  

    Jym Dyer

    @gneiss – I would estimate that 50% of the motorists I encounter on my commute home are using a handheld phone. Other motorists can’t see this as they often hold them in their lap or at the bottom of a steering wheel, but it’s very visible from a bicycle riding alongside.

  7.  

    Jym Dyer

    @ts2912 – “A” cyclist means that your anecdotal statistic is 1. Not exactly a number to base policy on.

  8.  

    Jym Dyer

    @DrG – AAA and CSAA are the “car coalition” you seek. They are far more powerful than the SFBC.

  9.  

    Jym Dyer

    @DrG – 2-3 people hospitalized by motorists every day in this city, 1 killed every 3 weeks. Apparently THAT ISN’T ENOUGH to justify your concern, or commentary.

  10.  

    Jym Dyer

    @DrG – It makes no sense to talk about one without the greater context that includes the other. Unless, of course one’s goal is misdirection and misemphasis.

  11.  

    Jym Dyer

    @SF Guest – Yes, motorists speeding is “frivolous” and is routinely and pointedly ignored in these discussions about how terrible bicyclists are. Of course, this means routine and pointed failure to look at the #1 correlator with serious injury and death. Whoopsy doodle!

  12.  

    Jym Dyer

    @p_chazz – That’s not thinking. That’s just making up nonsense.

  13.  

    Jym Dyer

    @runn3r85 – Gas taxes, tolls, and vehicle fees don’t add up to hardly 50% of the cost of highways (and, as you point out, contribute nothing to roads). The rest comes from general revenue

    In California, Arnold Schwarzenegger campaigned on not restoring vehicle fees, and instead pushed through Prop 1B, the largest public works bond in U.S. history, to fund the highways (and to nearly triple the costs with 30 years of bond debt service).

  14.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Prinzrob – The other angle on this is that the homeowner can deduct property tax from income tax, whereas the renter cannot deduct rent.

  15.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Abe Froman – Nobody said that. You, however, made a demand that bicyclists “[s]tart kicking into transportation infrastructure funding,” a demand with an inherent premise that bicyclists don’t already do so. The followup comments disprove that premise.

    Stop hoarking up this bogus premise it’s a complete waste of time and doesn’t support rational arguments.

  16.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Jimbo – Shortly after the tragedy, the SFPD made public statements that Bucchere ran a yellow, not a red light, but then they clammed up. During the trial, one witness claimed that Bucchere ran a red light, and immediately afterwards, Bucchere’s lawyer played video showing a crowd of pedestrians including this very witness walking into the crosswalk while the light was still yellow. Material evidence puts the lie to that testimony.

    The “Strava videogame” angle in which Bucchere was trying to “beat his personal best” was groundless speculation by a blogger, which went viral because it sounded so terrible. Yet actual review of the Strava records indicated no such thing.

    IMHO Bucchere was going too fast for conditions and reckless. Commenters who for some reason need to exaggerate what actually happened to demonize him even further are not being rational at all.

  17.  

    Matty J.

    Fair enough on the parking ticket issue, but my original opinion still remains. Bicyclists shouldn’t get away with running stop signs and whatnot just because cars are more dangerous.

  18.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Christopher Childs – Pedestrians have far fewer laws to follow than cars (with good reason, they do far less damage), but one of those few laws is that they do not have the right of way to enter a crosswalk to prevent a vehicle or bicycle from clearing an intersection.

  19.  

    Jym Dyer

    @murphstahoe – Which is why his arguments stink so badly.

  20.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Matty J. – Police don’t write up parking tickets, that’s left to the PCOs. As for “murder,” it kills far fewer people than routine motorist behavior, so that’s a very curious comparison indeed.

  21.  

    Jym Dyer

    @NoeValleyJim – The voters haven’t actually been given this choice. The 1989 ballot initiative that imposed a sales tax and created the SFCTC was campaigned for with promises of extending the Muni Metro system to Geary and two other corridors, and voters were under the impression that it would be rail (like the rest of the Muni Metro system). The initiative’s actual wording did not commit to rail, but to a “fixed guideway,” and a combination of lowered expectations and merchant opposition turned that into BRT. We voted to renew this with the same noncommittal wording.

  22.  

    Jym Dyer

    @liljenstolpe – Fixies are a red herring here, but do you seriously honestly actually believe that people are on the streets with no ability to stop? Do you seriously honestly actually believe that thing that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever?

    A fixed-gear bike can be stopped by pedaling it backwards, exactly the same way one stops a bike equipped with coaster brakes (not “breaks”).

  23.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Jimbo – Ah yes, the ol’ “self-police” advice. How do you propose to make that work, exactly? It’s not as if motorists have provided any guidance at this, but the notion persists, so how, exactly, do you imagine this working?

  24.  

    Jym Dyer

    @jamiebronson – You support this crackdown, which by Captain Sanford’s own narrative is based on his own anecdotal observations.

  25.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Jimbo – Interesting question. Why do police have an elaborate system of policies to let the vast majority of motoring lawbreakers do so with impunity? Why is there an entire parallel justice system required to process the many motorists who break the law egregiously enough to run afoul of those lenient policies?

  26.  

    murphstahoe

    cool story bro

  27.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Bob – Sorry to disappoint you, man, but I think she’s married to Lawrence Rosenfeld, who is the lead/moderator of Nextdoor The Inner Sunset. You would love the uninformed discourse there, it’s about 99% pearl-clutching, garment-rendering anecdotes.

    (99% is, of course, the carefully-calculated anecdata figure.)

  28.  

    Jym Dyer

    @SuperQ – It’s hard to be a squeaky wheel. When I first moved to S.F., decades ago, I encountered shockingly dangerous motorist behavior. I got a license plate, called the SFPD (not 911), and they said they really couldn’t be bothered to take a report unless there was actual contact.

    Later, I was brushed by a car in an intersection. Aha! Contact! I called the SFPD with the license plate, and they moved the goalposts: Well, I wasn’t injured, was I? They refused to take info over the phone, but invited me to come down and fill out a report, with the caveat that they weren’t actually going to do anything.

    I’m left wondering where they’re getting these complaints. Perhaps it’s people yelling at community meetings, such as the one Capt. Sanford opted not to show up at?

  29.  

    ts2912

    I agree!

  30.  

    Jimbo

    exactly why bicycles in the city should be registered and have a license plate.

  31.  

    Jimbo

    Ticketing people for breaking the law equates to enslaving and murdering people for centuries?

  32.  

    Jimbo

    We are not oppressed as black people in the modern world? Read the news lady. Or walk around SF. Do you see many black people? No because we have been stamped out by the only true gentrification that has happened in SF. Because someone doesn’t have the same tired opinion as everyone on here does not make them a troll. And I do think your comments are sick

  33.  

    Jimbo

    Racist

  34.  

    ts2912

    This is what happened to me about 4 years ago (every word is the absolute truth BTW)…
    a) I was driving through an intersection, I was the first car after the light turned green
    b) A bicyclist blew through the intersection, across the red light, across my path
    c) I stood on my brakes, the car behind me smashed into me
    d) Damage to the rear of my car was $1,650 (minus $1,000 deductible)
    e) Damage to the car behind me, far more

    (That d*rtbag cyclist just WAVED and went on)

  35.  

    ts2912

    I love your responses, hilarious!

    a) So stopping at a stop sign is more dangerous because you cannot get out of the way (of what??? A rear-ender?)

    b) Re. riding on the sidewalk, you may want to look at the DMV rules https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/?1dmy&urile=wcm:path:/dmv_content_en/dmv/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffdl37 (

    Bicycle riders on public roads have the same rights and responsibilities as motorists, and are subject to the same rules and regulations. Refer to theCalifornia Driver Handbook to become familiar with these rules.)

    c) I’m glad you follow at least one rule :)

  36.  

    ts2912

    So (in your books) cycling ‘more’ allows one to break the rules (more)?

    And BTW… I have cycled thousands of miles long before you born, and still cycle an hour or two per day

  37.  

    ts2912

    Wow!

    YOU (of all people) accuse me of immature responses!

    The man who is re-interpreting the traffic laws of this city

  38.  

    VWWV

    really, how much do you cycle?

  39.  

    VWWV

    Thanks for your super-mature response!

    a) you’re totally ignoring the content of what I said. Compared to yielding, yes, stopping IS more dangerous. If anyone fails to see you, you are COMPLETELY prone. If you’re rolling, you can get out of the way

    b) if no pedestrians are on the sidewalk, outside of business districts, it’s even legal. You don’t know what you’re talking about

    c)no one said this. What are you talking about?

  40.  

    ts2912

    YEAH
    a) Stopping at stop signs is insane (slowing down is all that’s needed)
    b) Riding sidewalks is okay (if you do it okay)
    c) Riding in the opposite direction of traffic makes perfect sense (to an experienced cyclist)

    You must be the founder of San Francisco’s bicycle coalition

  41.  

    jonobate

    Rather than me trying to explain it, might be easier just to look at videos of people navigating mini roundabouts in the UK. It’s just a more formalized (and therefore faster) version of the who’s-going-to-go-first dance that occurs at every four-way stop in America.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkWsVauzwTw

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXwQrrkF5-c

    In the first video, notice how most of the cars don’t go over the circle, but some of them do. The coach at 1:10 has to put a wheel over the circle because he’s a large vehicle. Some of the other ones, such as the white van at the end of the video, are clearly just being lazy.

  42.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Not that facts ever got in the way of your rants Jimbo, but you might want to know that 4% of all trips are made by bicycle these days and 17% of San Franciscans ride a bicycle at least once a week.

  43.  

    jonobate

    To protect what, the roundabout?

    The circle is there to indicate how you should move your vehicle through the intersection. If you follow the arrows on the road and yield to anyone already on the roundabout, you won’t cause an accident, even if you put a wheel onto the circle. If you completely ignore the circle and just swing your car across it, then you’ll cause an accident, and you’ll be deemed responsible for it for ignoring the road markings.

    As a European who has lived (and driven) in America for nearly 6 years now, I’m certain that Americans are no different to Europeans in terms of driving mentality; the difference is in the infrastructure. People of all nationalities will adapt to whatever driving infrastructure that is put in place for them to use. I’m sure American drivers will deal with navigating a roundabout, painted or otherwise.

  44.  

    NoeValleyJim

    No, we need physical barriers. Even Americans generally will not damage their cars deliberately.

  45.  

    jonobate

    If your argument for not making roadway changes is “Americans won’t get it”, we may as well give up on the idea of safe streets altogether.

  46.  

    VWWV

    totally, got it.

  47.  

    VWWV

    no, safe cycling is slowing at the intersection, yielding right of way, and proceeding when it’s safe. And most muicipalities have provisions for this. Just not san francisco. Stopping, dead, at every single stop sign, with no oncoming or cross-traffic is inane.

  48.  

    roymeo

    Maybe my description sucked: the truck was stopped at the light in the southbound lane behind the crosswalk as it should have been. And you couldn’t see around it to know if there were peds in front of it if you were going to blow through the stop light.

  49.  

    ts2912

    AbsoFingLutely!!!

    (That’s called safe driving or cycling, and tards who ignore traffic rules give everyone a bad name)

  50.  

    jd_x

    This website and especially these comments are exactly for having a discussion/debate: it’s hardly stamping feet and having a tantrum. My invovlement in bicycle advocacy outside this forum is irrelevant to the discussion at hand or to my points, and saying that it’s stamping feet or having a tantrum just shuts down the discussion.

    And there is no doubt that the way many motorists drive is definitely pyschotic. Or perhaps a better way of saying it is: showing obvious signs of addiction. Addiction makes you do irrational and dangerous things even when you know it’s bad for and others, and that’s exactly what I see from motorists as well as SFPD by not only condoning it but by actively pursuing bicyclists for mundane “letter of the law” violations let alone actually protecting bicyclists.

    You seen to believe that if bicyclists just abide by the law and lobby their political leaders, it will all work out. And though lobbying leaders is a necessary part of the process, it’s not sufficient especially when talking about a massive cultural bias such as automobile-centric thinking. The way you even plant the seed that affects change is through public discourse, be it on this forum or elsewhere.

    Further, the leaders have been lobbied heavily for many years, yet we still can’t get our police department, for example, to follow official city policy or respect statistics when it comes to transportation safety. Hell, we’ve been a “transit first” city since the 70s, and look down 99% of roads with 2 rows of parked cars lined up and down the sides and most space devoted to personal motorized vehicles with public transit caught in this mess, and then tell me that after 40 years “transit first” is anything but a slogan. And with SFPD up to their usual car-centric nonsense as exemplified by this article, Vision Zero will be just a slogan like “transit first”. Therefore, I believe that change needs to come from being vocal and pointing out the irrationality and yes, pyschotic, behavior of many drivers. Of course, nobody likes that, but welcome to criticism when you are behaving badly. You can bet womens/gay/black rights organizers pissed off a lot of people with their criticism and trying to buck the status quo, and the same will apply here. Welcome to creating societal change.