From: brad@cup.portal.com (Paul B Anders)
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
Subject: Re: BICYCLE CRASH
Date: 6 Apr 92 16:36:16 GMT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

John Hamilton writes :

>Yes, they picked out one of the known intersections where everyone does
>Hollywood stops and cracked down on it. That does not make a statistically
>valuable contribution to the discussion, since it does not represent the
>norm. Again, I can only comment about the traffic I am involved in daily,
>and it does not include Palo Alto's worst intersection. Thats like saying
>all people who drive pink cars are... well, its just not a reasonable
>conclusion.

Well, even data for one intersection is certainly more actual data than you
have presented. Where are your statistics? By the way, I doubt that it was
one intersection, I'll get the report and post later.

> PBA> as bicycles. I'll bet that within a week, you would find motorcyclists
> PBA> doing the same things you are hassling bicyclists for. So, would your
> PBA> solution be to (as you commended) GET THOSE MOTORCYCLES THE HELL OFF THE
> PBA> ROAD!? No. The solution is to get equal enforcement of traffic laws. A
> PBA> few tickets for running stop signs and the like and most bicyclists
> PBA> would get the point.
>
>I'm NOT the one who EVER wrote "Get those <whatever kind of vehicles> the
>hell off the road". Get your quotes right. Each of my posts has stated
>clearly bicyclists have a right to be on the road, I just wish they'd
>also adhere to right-of-way laws (more than anything else).

Blinders off, John. I said you commended the "GET THOSE BIKES OFF THE ROAD" 
message. I didn't say you wrote it. For proof, here is your earlier posting:

>Tuesday March 31 1992, ham!emd@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca writes to All:
>
> hwbc> Motorcycles are only like bicycles in that both vehicles have two
> hwbc> wheels. Motorcycles are designed to travel at high speeds, have adequat
e
> hwbc> brakes, and good suspension systems. They are required to be registered
,
> hwbc> carry insurance and riders are obligated by the state to demonstrate
> hwbc> some form of competence. None of this applies to bicyclists. So please
> hwbc> take your bicycle and STAY OFF THE DAMN ROAD!
>
>Well spoken! While I always do my best to see bicycles, and avoid them, it
>never fails to amaze me when they run stop signs/lights, ignore the turn
>signals of cars in front of them, and make obscene gestures if you are
>in their way. Talk about lunacy, since one gear shift and they'd be history.

Seems to me that "Well spoken!" sounds like an endorsement of Mr. Smit's 
statement "So please take your bicycle and STAY OFF THE DAMN ROAD!" So much
for your support of bicycles right to the road.

> PBA> Well, John, bicyclists talk shit when someone condones the message of
> PBA> "GET YOUR BICYCLE OFF THE DAMN ROAD!" as you have done. I'm sure as a
> PBA> motorcycle rider you would do the same if it were suggested that
> PBA> motorcycles should be taken off the road. They also talk shit when
> PBA> somebody implies in a message (your response to Mr. Smits) that running
> PBA> over a bicyclist who is breaking a law is a good way to deal with the
> PBA> problem. So stop whining.
>
>Once again, and slowly, I NEVER said that. If you can't quote correctly,
>and attribute correctly, don't bother. You look stupid blaming me for
>what someone else wrote. You are the whiner.

Once again, and slowly, try to remember what you actually wrote. I know it's
convinent to forget your inconsistancies when they are pointed out to you, 
but most adults learn to deal with it. Notice again that I did not say that
you wrote the statement, but that you condoned it.

> PBA> I'm sure that you act responsibly, drive and ride responsibly, and are
> PBA> actually quite rational. However, by supporting an idiot such as Mr.
> PBA> Smits, you help the driver who decides to take a bicyclist off the road
> PBA> somewhere deep up in the Santa Cruz Mountains to justify his actions.
> PBA> Try to see where the problem is (enforcement), and can the anti-bike
> PBA> rhetoric.
>
>Nothing I've written is anti-bicycle. Re-read all my posts (no re:'s, but
>originals from me) on the suject and you will see you've written this post
>before putting your brain in gear.

Nothing you've written is anti-bicycle? I have re-read your posts, and have 
included material you wrote which condones blatant anti-bike statements. 
As for putting my brain in gear, I leave it to net readers to figure out 
who among us is stuck in reverse.

Brad Anders
brad@cup.portal.com