Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Catrike Ryder Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Subject: Re: Cycling and social policy Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:47:44 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 79 Message-ID: <38du3kd3t9eqqjkkulrh56um2et8rir05k@4ax.com> 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2025 19:47:47 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3d34e04fca600bacf62ae5311c6ee752"; logging-data="193272"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18DZKYgi+cy1yiE7hEZnJ5iDB4W5sK1zzM=" User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 Cancel-Lock: sha1:2IJo2LeF8fQNi+x5vn7tp94/WtE= >El Salvador On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 11:47:14 -0400, 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. I can get all the leftist propaganda I want without paying for it. -- C'est bon Soloman