Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<101ofca$ilu4$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Cycling and social policy
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 23:43:04 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 100
Message-ID: <101ofca$ilu4$1@dont-email.me>
References: <101f650$178mo$1@dont-email.me> <101g9rj$1hvsg$5@dont-email.me>
 <101hnal$24ksl$2@dont-email.me> <101mi1u$3ua51$3@dont-email.me>
 <101mskd$aqa$3@dont-email.me> <101n5e3$2sls$2@dont-email.me>
 <101n5uh$3t0p$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 05:43:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cd3bdef4863cc79cdb9178e77915e25b";
	logging-data="612292"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/vrqJm3onzVRLV3BLHzbIEXDUutT2MHrU="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YBtpYaA6RhBFPC+J83lZRvpEoZc=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <101n5uh$3t0p$1@dont-email.me>

On 6/3/2025 11:56 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 6/3/2025 10:47 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 6/3/2025 9:17 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 6/3/2025 5:16 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>> On 6/1/2025 10:15 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 5/31/2025 8:19 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/31/2025 11:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> https://nypost.com/2025/05/30/opinion/lefties-pro- migrant- push- 
>>>>>>> back- on- tischs-e-bike-crackdown-is- obscene/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The New York Post trades heavily in sensationalism and political 
>>>>>> divisiveness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here was the main point in the New York Times article I linked on 
>>>>>> this issue: "Cyclists who blow through red lights without 
>>>>>> endangering anyone else can now be forced to appear in court. 
>>>>>> Drivers who commit the same violation cannot." As I presently 
>>>>>> noted here, immigrants, legal or not, were barely mentioned. 
>>>>>> Complaints centered around the fact that bikes or ebikes are a 
>>>>>> tiny portion of pedestrian risk - motor vehicles are far, far more 
>>>>>> dangerous - but motoring offenses are treated far more lightly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And regarding the incident linked within your NYP article 
>>>>>> regarding a 3-year-old girl getting knocked down when she ran into 
>>>>>> a protected bike lane: Both the article describing it and the bulk 
>>>>>> of reader comments faulted the design of the bike lane, not the 
>>>>>> fact that it was an ebike. If there was _any_ mention of 
>>>>>> immigrants, it was minor. (I'm one of those who think that 
>>>>>> facility design is nuts.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally, let's please remember that most immigrants are legal. 
>>>>>> Many do take low paying jobs, including things like food delivery, 
>>>>>> but that does not make them into illegals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I found the 'discrimination toward illegals' argument interesting 
>>>>> in a macabre sort of way.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yes, I agree with you that most foreigners here are legally 
>>>>> present. I am a strong proponent of clarity to distinguish among 
>>>>> newly naturalized citizens, temporary visa holders, resident aliens 
>>>>> and illegal aliens. Conflating those is dishonest if not pernicious.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yet you had no problem conflating a comment from a community 
>>>> activist who said e-bike legislation was an attempt to marginalize 
>>>> the immigrant community with support for illegal immigration.
>>>
>>> It was not I.
>>>
>>>  From the report linked above:
>>>
>>> "The proof? How they used a budget hearing to assail NYPD 
>>> Commissioner Jessica Tisch for deciding to issue criminal summonses 
>>> to law-breaking e-bike riders, instead of mere traffic-court tickets, 
>>> to discourage reckless road behavior.
>>>
>>> Their gripe?
>>>
>>> A lot of e-bike riders are delivery drivers for food apps, and a lot 
>>> of delivery drivers are illegal immigrants — who might get deported 
>>> if slapped with a criminal summons."
>>
>> Again, that seems to be _your_ take on the reason for the complaints. 
>> But I don't think that take is justified by the total text of the 
>> article, nor its points of emphasis. As I read it, the main complaint 
>> was that motorists are obviously a much greater hazard, yet are being 
>> treated much more gently than ebike riders. Hell, look at the relative 
>> fatality counts.
>>
>> Certainly, the vast majority of NYC ebike riders have nothing to do 
>> with delivering food. Yes, ebikers should be reasonably obedient to 
>> the laws ("reasonably" since nobody is perfect). But ISTM that those 
>> with the largest negative impact on society should be treated most 
>> harshly.
>>
> 
> You didn't find it odd that New Yorkers would just assume food delivery 
> on electric bicycles was by illegal aliens?  I did.
> 
> If the deliverers are indeed illegal and working, that's a violation of 
> Federal law, as is hiring/paying them on the employer's part. I'm sure 
> that happens but to significant numbers of electric bicycle pilots? I'm 
> skeptical.

At this point, it's difficult for me to tell what we agree on or 
disagree on, regarding the NYT and NYP articles.

For (attempted) clarity on my views: ISTM the pedestrians have 
complained about hazards from ebikes. ISTM others complain that errant 
motorists are treated more kindly than ebike riders, even though 
motorists constitute a much greater hazard.

And ISTM that the fundamental issue has next to nothing to do with 
immigrants, legal or illegal. However, some right wingers have been 
triggered, as usual, by the very thought of immigrants in America.


-- 
- Frank Krygowski