Some modest proposals regarding bicycle riders in Seattle
This writer has had about enough of their sense of entitlement, their arrogance, their carelessness, and their attire.
The biggest factor contributing to Seattle's horrendous traffic congestion is obvious to anyone who stands for just a few minutes at a downtown street corner, a suburban intersection, or anywhere within 10 blocks of the UW, SU, SPU, UPS, WCTU, ACLU, SPL – pretty much anywhere in town, actually, except the streets immediately adjacent to the Rainier Club.
There are too many bicycles. They're like anthrax invading the bloodstream, forcing the Ford and Toyota white corpuscles to cling to artery walls, desperately in need of a bypass. I don't actually know if anthrax invades the bloodstream like that, but you get my four-wheel drift. Something nasty invades the bloodstream and clogs things up, just like nasty bicyclists invade the streets we gas buyers have paid for with our taxes, making it impossible for us to get anywhere on time, which has a negative effect on the economy and results in lost jobs, etc.
Compounding the problem is an unfortunate attitude flip-flop that has developed among bicyclists. In the good old days, a bicyclist knew that if he or she dared get on a road otherwise occupied by cars, he or she was at God's mercy, putting his or her life in His or Her hands. Hit one of these transgressing pedalers and that's the breaks, bicycle boy – government's on my side, as long as I didn't have to jump the curb to get you. And even then, I'm OK if I catch a judge who drives a Buick.
This hierarchical tradition still exists in Seattle re pedestrians. Although the shank's mare crowd is bolder now and rapid jaywalking has become endemic (except in the streets immediately adjacent to the Rainier Club), we motorists can still amuse ourselves by seeing how close to walkers' heels we can come, without much fear of constabulary attention. (It's the sole interest we share with bicyclists, actually.) But the two-wheelists no longer consider themselves such fair game. Ironically, as they have become more numerous they have acted more like endangered species, to be coddled at the expense of others. You'd think every Spandex-wearing, stallion-thighed, goateed git on a bike was a sperm whale being chased by the Japanese.
And here's an even more frightening development. Last week, I observed a bicyclist running a stop sign in Wallingford. Nothing outré about that, it happens a hundred times a day just at that particular bottom-of-a-hill sign. But this bicyclist was talking on her cell phone as she did it, barley glancing over to sneer at us drivers with the right-of-way. When motor vehicle cell-phone use is having such a disastrous effect on America that governments pedal. Can two-wheel text messaging be far behind? Can chaos be far behind that? And with the way federal, state, and local governments kowtow to the bikers, innocently smacking your car into a bicyclist with a cell phone will soon lead not only to a felony conviction, but a fine from the Federal Communications Commission.
Writing recently on Crosscut, a Mr. K. "S" Berger suggested that the problem here is not just you-know-who. "The real transportation problem," wrote Mr. Berger, "is the culture of transportation." (Emphasis his.) He contended that part of this cultural problem is that drivers hate bikers. Well, I'm a driver, and I don't hate the arrogant bastards (emphasis mine), even if there's ample evidence that they hate me. I just want a level asphalt playing field. Bicyclists, for instance, seem to be invisible to the Seattle Police Department. What other assumption can you make when dozens of times a day a biker will break a traffic law as a cop watches, and watches, and watches, until the officer finally wanders off to check the parking meters around the hospitals?
And where are these people allowed to ride their bikes, everywhere? On the sidewalk, through crosswalks, in car pool lanes, on planting strips, through the sewers – is there anywhere they can't go? (Not that there's anybody to stop them if they did go some place forbidden, but just supposing.) About the only places you can drive now and escape the bikers are Interstates 5, 90, and 405. How long do you think that's going to last, when the bikers realize the freeways are there, ripe for the clogging?
Mr. Berger thinks the solution to the transportation problem – the alleged cultural problem – is to have a meeting. (Can anybody be that Seattle?) And he wants to use "a few hundred million dollars in transportation spending" to send everyone to a remedial class on rules of the road, like a driver's ed refresher course, only with an expanded curriculum to include the fact that there are a lot of bike riders on the road now who think they own it.
This will not work, for the same reason meetings and classes never work. It's too easy not to show up. (Or I'd have an advanced degree.) However, the following plan will work, and not require me or anybody else to attend anything:
- Mayor Greg Nickels – the man who said on April 4 that he wanted to "make Seattle the best bicycling city in the nation" – should be required to ride a bike to work and everywhere else he goes for the rest of his life. Let him slap that giant tokhes on a banana seat three or four hours a day and see how bike-loving he is then. And if he wants to run for re-election or higher office (could that possibly be!?) he better work my neighborhood on his Schwinn if he wants me to answer the door. (Although he doesn't have to wear the black Spandex. Please.)
- No more bikes on sidewalks. Citizens should be allowed to carry spoke-spiking, sawed-off broom handles to help the police enforce this law.
- All bicyclists shall be required to wear helmets weighing at least 12 pounds, put pink streamers on the ends of their handlebars, and attach playing cards to the spokes of their bikes, no matter how hotshot Lance Armstrongy they think they are. These arrogance-reduction devices will have a dramatic effect on their speed and audacity, and the noise from the clacking cards will also make cell-phone use problematic, especially with big helmets covering their ears.
- Part of the mayor's transportation plan includes 37 miles of new bike lanes. Make the new lane one long 37-mile stretch, going south, parallel to the freeway. And make it one way, so eventually all of Seattle's bikers are circling around each other in the Tacoma Dome parking lot. This will help our neighbor to the south, which needs any culture it can get, even Mr. Berger's "transportation culture." And frankly, I can live with Tacoma being the best bicycling city in the nation. They deserve it.
Topics:
Crime,
Lifestyle,
Outdoors,
Seattle,
Seattle City Hall,
Washington,
Politics,
Transportation
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Wed, May 2, 6:33 a.m. Inappropriate
We've come a long way from the days when my Schwinn Paper Boy Special was both a fun thing, a tool with which to earn a little pork chop money, and my transportation to and from school (books and papers marginally safe tucked in my Arizona Republic paperbags). Now, you spend more on a bicycle than it seems I did on my first house! And the accessories! No one wore helmets back then, and I don't recall ever hearing of anyone worrying about getting hurt or hit or anything. We just rode our bikes.
And the bicyclists of today with their supercillious, better than thou attitude, are so unctuous! They ignore stop signs and cut in traffic because of a sense of moral purity that gives them some sort of right to ignore all others because what they do - pump their bare legs in 40 degree rainy weather - is a holy as well as healthy act.
Let them eat Krispy Kremes!
Good stuff, Palmer!
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 8:35 a.m. Inappropriate
funny!: Ah, I love a bit of satire in the morning!
Posted Wed, May 2, 9:34 a.m. Inappropriate
Very funny, and oh so true.
Now if the author had only used Swifts solution in "A Modest Proposal" about reducing the population of arrogant bicyclists...one must consider cooking and eating them, or perhaps using those hefty thighs as sashimi. Honestly, Tom Douglas could have a field day with that, creating a whole new restaurant around canibalism of beefy vegetarian free-range bikers.
Yummy alder-smoked bicyclists! Wild bikers ala mode!
Satire is just so delicious, don't you think?
DeAnn
Posted Wed, May 2, 9:40 a.m. Inappropriate
I've seen this done in other areas of "journalism": writers pen pieces that they (should) know are misguided and inflammatory, in hopes of attracting large volumes of traffic from the outraged masses of people they'd been hoping to offend. "There's no such thing as bad publicity", the saying goes.
I'll say this much: I've seen plenty of bicyclists flout traffic laws, particularly when commuting by bike, bus, or car to and from downtown Seattle or Belltown. I've also seen plenty of drivers do the same in the presence of bicylists. Sometimes these actions by bicylists seem deliberately inspired to aggravate drivers, just as sometimes those actions by drivers seem deliberately inspired to aggravate those bicyclists.
Needless to say, neither sort of action is constructive.
Much as is the case for this article, satire or no, which may inspire the nuttier sort of driver to commit ever more flagrant moving violations in the immediate vicinity of bicyclists, which I sincerely hope will not endanger the safety of those bicyclists, who, unlike those motorists, are not surrounded by a 2500 pound safety cage of steel and glass.
Other than that, the less said about this article, the better.
John C. Todd, Jr.
Greater Greenwood Bi/Ped Safety Coalition
Posted Wed, May 2, 10:28 a.m. Inappropriate
Taxing the bikers: Mandatory licencing, registration, insurance, testing etc. to the tune of several thousand dollars per year per bicycle would be another great idea.
Posted Wed, May 2, 10:40 a.m. Inappropriate
Or you could go the other way...: I think it's time for bicycle freeways. Maybe we let cars keep I-5, and hand over the viaduct for bicycles. Of course we'll remove the massive ugly structure and put in something small and elegant that doesn't need to carry endless tons of steel. Or we could go for a (much, much less expensive) small tunnel just to get out of the rain...
Posted Wed, May 2, 11:49 a.m. Inappropriate
I never expected a huge reaction from bicyclists, certainly not in a WRITTEN medium.
Posted Wed, May 2, 12:02 p.m. Inappropriate
Most of the time the response you receive from bicyclists is a digital salute as they run a red light or barely avoid running down some poor little kid on the Burke - Gilman who doesn't understand that all must yield to the power of the pedal.
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 12:27 p.m. Inappropriate
Since if we complain we can't win, and saying nothing encourages people to ignore our rights to the road, I have the following modest proposal for you. I'd like to invite you for a ride. May is Bike to Work Month, and I think you should get in the spirit and join me for a commute. Let me know if you want to take me up on the offer.
Posted Wed, May 2, 12:59 p.m. Inappropriate
And you could go a long way toward insulating yourself from satire of this type if you would butt (here it comes) not cover it with all that spandex! The sight of a couple smoked Virginia hams all wrapped in skin tight fabric with Italian and French words on it is just too much for those of us with delicate sensabilities, especially when we routinely see that...whatever it is...when we've either been cut off or run down.
But if you really want to rag on something...how about corduroy sport coats? Like the ones Greg Palmer used to wear all the time while doing movie reviews on King 5. Those were the days!
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 1:05 p.m. Inappropriate
>> All I Hoped to Prove ... is that bicycle riders are humor impaired.
In other words, you were hoping to get bicyclists to flame your article, as I inferred. (Not that anyone has, at least so far.)
Nice.
Constructive, too.
(How's the irony sensor working for you?)
The point stands, however. If you're encouraging motorists to further antagonize (if not outright endanger) bicyclists from the safety of their 2500+ pound steel and glass safety cages, in satire or no, then you are not helping.
You might want to check out a few resources to see what damage this sort of "humor" is capable of contributing to. Here's one:
http://www.pedinroads.org/maps
This is life and death stuff, Greg. Don't make it worse.
John C. Todd, Jr.
Greater Greenwood Bi/Ped Safety Coalition
Posted Wed, May 2, 1:25 p.m. Inappropriate
Not all cyclists are humor impaired, of course, any more than all motorists. I'm sure there are just as many motorists who wouldn't see the humor in suggesting keying paint jobs and spiking tires, even if they knew you were joking.
Posted Wed, May 2, 1:46 p.m. Inappropriate
Ha ha. ha?: I suppose the line about meetings and advanced degrees was cute. But, hey, The Piper sure seemed to like it!
Posted Wed, May 2, 1:50 p.m. Inappropriate
Piper, for someone who likes to lecture about humor: you seem to be taking Greg's article pretty seriously.
Posted Wed, May 2, 1:54 p.m. Inappropriate
I'd tell you Todd...: to "get a life" but then, you're a 'cyclist and would have no idea what to do once you got one.
Posted Wed, May 2, 2:02 p.m. Inappropriate
Perhaps, Greg, you might want to contact Amy Freedheim at the KC Prosecutor's Office who handles most of the vehicular homicide cases and ask if she thinks it's funny. I'm sure you could also talk to a counselor in the Victim's Advocate division who could refer you to the family of someone who was killed. I'm sure they would find your article hilarious.
Posted Wed, May 2, 2:13 p.m. Inappropriate
RE:Corduroy sport jackets: I am thrilled someone remembers my simply stunning collection of corduroy jackets, which I gave some years ago to a company of Indian singers and dancers from Jharjhkand (formerly Southern Behar), led by Mukund Nayak, who came here for the Children's Festival and got off the plane wearing tee shirts and dhotis, apparently under the impression that Seattle, like India, would be in the 80s in May. (Many of them had never been more than 20 miles from their village before they came here.) We wrapped those folks up in corduroy, and they didn't freeze, proudly taking the jackets with them when they left. Now I am proud to say the spirit of corduroy survives in India, being worn by these splendid folks as they wop their tablas, etc.
Posted Wed, May 2, 2:24 p.m. Inappropriate
Anyway, I wanted to correct one claim of yours. Gas taxes play only a very small role in paying for city street construction and maintenance (all Washington cities share less than 10 percent of the gas tax funds collected by the state). Most Seattle streets were built with general fund dollars and many will soon be repaired with property tax money from the ballot measure approved last fall. In other words, the streets belong to bicyclists, too.
Posted Wed, May 2, 2:30 p.m. Inappropriate
Suggestion to Crosscut editors...: IMO, Palmer's piece sounds like a good candidate for a rebuttal article from Paul Andrews.
Posted Wed, May 2, 2:46 p.m. Inappropriate
Your corduroy donation was another example of Western imperialism run amok! As penance, ride a bicycle.
The Piper...who proudly wears his imperial kilt
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:03 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: Corduroy sport jackets: I didn't force them to wear the corduroy jackets, they WANTED them, they asked for them, they were really really pleased to have them, almost as pleased as Mrs. Palmer was to get rid of them--the jackets, that is, not the Indians. I rather looked on it as revenge for the Nehru jacket.
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:17 p.m. Inappropriate
Every fibre of my being tells me I should just ignore your specious reply, but at least I'll try to be brief. If humor is going to be restricted to only those areas of the human experience where there is no tragedy, then there will be no humor, and I don't think even you want that--you just want to pick the restricted areas to subjects you don't care about. Okay, but when you get the assignment, please remember I had a cousin who was killed in a plane crash, so please, no humor about airplanes or plane travel. Today alone thousands of children the world over will die of starvation, so please, no humor about children, or food either, because of course thousands of people die each year choking, or accidentally eating poisonous foods. (I read once where 14% of all people hospitalized for bee stings die, so that riotous story you do about bees? Please drop that immediately.) Hospitals and medical care? Certainly not. Boy/girl humor? Have you seen the statistics on lethal domestic violence recently? Military humor? Conservatively 30 million people died in the Second World War, and that's just in the European theater.
Enough.
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:22 p.m. Inappropriate
Thanks for the correction on who pays for the roads, and your insight about writing humor.
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:25 p.m. Inappropriate
First: If you think this article is going to embolden drivers to use less caution around bicyclists – if you are suggesting that this article creates actual danger by its very existence – I think you're delusional. I could as easily argue that the sanctimonious negative reaction in the comments is every bit as inciting, but I won't, because that would be stupid.
Second, I do a fair amount of urban bicycling myself, and I try to keep a low profile in shared space. I think it's possible to avoid putting oneself in danger, and I ride accordingly. I expect the worst from autos, and I don't think having to think that way is any burden. It's just smart. Plan a safe route, stay out of others' space. No big deal.
I also expect the worst from cyclists when I am in my car or walking. Because I see a lot of careless people on bikes out there, and some of the most careless are the ones who seem the most devoted to riding. Some actually seem to put themselves unnecessarily in harm's way to make a point. Others call out "on your left" a millisecond before whizzing by on the sidewalk and do little or nothing else to make your walk safe from their proximity. That's behavior almost as bad as that of an uncareful motorist.
Wanna know who really incites dangerous behavior? The monthly Critical Mass rides downtown, during which bicyclists brazenly break the law and create a danger to themselves and unfairly create liability for motorists who are minding their own business.
Don't even get me started about the many – though certainly not all – downtown messengers who ride anywhere, everywhere, unsafely fast and rudely.
There is a legitimate case to be made that some bicyclists are arrogant and dangerous themselves, and Greg Palmer just made it.
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:29 p.m. Inappropriate
Thanks for the invitation, but I'm having a hard time seeing the purpose of my participation. You write as if under the impression that I don't ride a bike, that I've never ridden a bike, that I haven't in fact ridden a bike to work some time in my life. All of these assumptions are false, and if you were standing on East Mercer Way on Mercer Island in, oh, 1959, you would have seen me pedaling by on my brand new Raleigh, maroon in color, bugs in my teeth. And I have had numerous bikes since then. What I haven't done is ridden a bike to YOUR work, but then, why should I?
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:34 p.m. Inappropriate
Memo to the humor impaired: The ol' Piper enjoys afflicting the comfortable with humor. He isn't amused when human tragedy - alcoholism and drunken binges - are used in a cynical manner...when the afflicted are laughed at.
Of course it's a tragedy when anyone is injured or killed in an accident. But I'm going to throw this out simply to ponder: what level of assumption of the risk is there when bicyclists seek to compete with those 3.500 lbs steel and glass behemoths that most of us still prefer? Sadly, accidents will happen. Because they do, are we to to be forever precluded from otherwise commenting on what is, frankly, a huge PITA for many, many, many non's, and that's bicyclists and their seeming attitude of, "Gang way! Two wheels good, four wheels bad!" (Slight acknowledgment to George Orwell's Animal Farm).
All this reminds me of a time when Johnny Carson hosted the Tonight Show. He poked fun at dentists in general, and he was sued by one in particular. Carson, master of comedy that he was, turned the tables on the dentist and made him BY NAME the subject of a devestating comedy sketch. Best way to deal with a stuffed shirt is to let out its air.
Hmmm...What about a dentist on a bicycle? Anyone have any thoughts?
Believe me, as a highland piper who wears the garb of ol' Gaul, I'm the target of more ridicule then any 100 pedalists. It goes with the territory. Perhaps you might wish to consider...ditto bicyclists?
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 3:48 p.m. Inappropriate
Rembmer the old Fred Meyer ad? "We have suits for guys who don't like ties." Confess...you had how many?
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:01 p.m. Inappropriate
At the risk of (re)stating the obvious, this satire sounds almost anti-motor vehicle to me. The opening paragraph should have tipped you off!
If Palmer had been any more obvious, it would have taken the edge off it, which would have been a shame. From someone who prefers walking to driving, I appreciate the smart writing. Thanks!
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:04 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: The Opening Paragraph Makes it Clear: And I guess the title makes it clear too. I never thought Swift was serious about eating people, although I might not have had dinner at his house.
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:11 p.m. Inappropriate
And thank you. I've hesitated to point out that, traffic-congestion-wise, I do the best possible thing and work from home, commuting down a flight of stairs, rarely on a bike. I've also enjoyed the fact that nobody has complained about the offhand reference to the mayor's giant posterior.
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:16 p.m. Inappropriate
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:24 p.m. Inappropriate
Curious...did he serve some fava beans and a nice Chianti?
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:28 p.m. Inappropriate
As for the purpose of your participation. You implied in your post that bicyclists ignore laws, and in general cause traffic mayhem. In that regard you have misjudged me and lots of other people that ride lawfully and legally every time they go out on their bikes. I was hoping to have a friendly ride to demonstrate that and maybe change your mind about bicyclists in Seattle. That purpose can be served by riding to your place of work, my place of work, or just going for a ride anytime.
I'd be more than willing to ride to your place of work if it works out better for you. I apologize, I should have made my offer clearer. So I'll again invite you to go for a ride sometime. Either to my work, your work or whatever destination you might care to choose for the ride.
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:47 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: Corduroy sport jackets: How many what? Polyester leisure suits? Never owned one in my life. I did have a pair of bright red Hush Puppies in the eighth grade, that was as close as I got. And I didn't wear them long. I was going out the door one day wearing them and my father said, "Red shoes?" I said "yes," proudly. He said 'Is everybody wearing red shoes?" I said, "no, I'm the only one." He said, "I've always found it wisest to be the first guy in the second fifty percent." And though neither of us ever followed that advice, it did have an effect.
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:54 p.m. Inappropriate
Seattle and Bellingham (WWSC) weren't prepared for such a level of sartorial splendor!
Two leisure suits, and one Nehru jacket...I have no shame!
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 4:56 p.m. Inappropriate
You should consider running for president: your approach to traffic congestion is almost a logical as Reagan's conviction that trees pollute or whatever Bush's latest argument is as to why we are winning the war on terror in Iraq. Mission accomplished!
The fact is: cars cause traffic congestion; not bikes. You acknowledge this yourself when you observed a bicyclist running a stop sign. Cars frequently pass bikes, but they can't get around the guy stopped in the Hummer, whether or not he is on the phone. And if a bicyclist runs a stop sign, consider who is going to be hurt if someone is coming the other way in an Expedition?
While I don't want to be the one advocating for bicyclist flouting the law, perhaps that ought to be your modest proposal–you might even get rid of a few of us in the process.
The reality is that bicyclists are at the mercy of drivers, whether we acknowledge it or not. Rarely is a person injured by a bicycle-- other than the person on a bike. This is why DUI laws do not apply to bicyclists. The Washington Court of Appeals noted that "drunk bicyclists are not capable of causing the tremendous ‘carnage and slaughter' associated with drunk driving" and specifically held that "neither legislative intent, the statutory scheme, nor public policy support the conclusion that RCW 46.60.502 [the DUI law] was intended to apply to bicyclists." City of Montesano v. Daniel Wells, 79 Wn. App. 529, 536, 902 P.2d 1266 (1995).
As for your proposal that the Mayor ride a bike, I'm all for it. The bike lanes we hear about won't do a thing when drivers like you amuse themselves by seeing how close they can drive to bikes. Moreover, putting bike lanes between traffic and parking areas invites collisions. Maybe you and the mayor should go on a ride together. Heck, you could even talk on your cell phones if you like.
Posted Wed, May 2, 5:09 p.m. Inappropriate
Hey!: I'm a cyclist!
Posted Wed, May 2, 5:10 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: All I Hoped to Prove: Hey, I'm a bicycle rider!
Posted Wed, May 2, 5:11 p.m. Inappropriate
Give the poor guy a break! Unless, that is...
Hey Chuck Taylor! Do you pay your contibutors by the word...or the comment? If it's by the word, each of Greg's were golden. If by the comment, I certainly hope he isn't padding this thing with a series of comments from nom de guerres. Like, one for each of the old coduroy sportcoats?
The Piper
Posted Wed, May 2, 7:37 p.m. Inappropriate
And tell me, just how many Hummers are you seeing on the road these days, those Hummers that bicyclists can't get around? Out of thousands and thousands of cars, I see maybe a Hummer a week, but then maybe you live in some real mutherhummer part of town.
"Rarely is a person injured by a bicycle" --on the road, that's true. But on the sidewalk, Bob, where increasingly in the past few years bicyclists dash to avoid traffic, expecting people to leap out of their way? I've been hit twice by bicyclists on Fourth Avenue downtown, guys who were a block away by the time I recovered--one a messenger, one not. And I once saw a bicyclist drop a woman to the ground at Green Lake, shout "I'm sorry," and not miss a stroke going away. I'd be the first to admit these are isolated incidents and not typical of most bicycle-pedestrian interaction--kind of like, oh, the isolated incident of the Hummer, Bob.
The argument I've been hearing all day is that bicyclists deserve all the perks, all the advantages, all the road and all the smug arrogance because they are at greater risk--if a collision occurs between a bike and a car, the bike will almost always suffer the most. By that logic, we should turn our streets over to, in order of priority, people crawling on all fours, cats and dogs, small children, old pedestrians, middle-aged pedestrians, skateboarders, tricycles, bicycles, very small cars, middle sized cars, big cars, SUVs, HUMMERS, small vans, city busses, and the Ducks full of tourists.
Finally, Bob, I want to thank you for ending my day with the delightful news (at least to me) that bicyclists can ride drunk without fear of arrest. Frankly, I think that fact is one in my column, Bob, not yours. Talk about the cops and the courts letting bicyclists get away with murder. And don't you feel just a little bit guilty about that particular perk?
Posted Wed, May 2, 7:54 p.m. Inappropriate
Now, pedestrians over here in Honolulu appear to be taking their very lives in their hands this year and mock the sensibilities described of Seattle bicyclists - "if I just keep my head down and facing forward and jaywalk in front of this stream of cars looking older and Asian I can get away with this". Haven't hit one yet!
Posted Wed, May 2, 8:42 p.m. Inappropriate
I was going to discuss your mayorial reference, but I thought I'd leave that to Tim Ceis.
Posted Wed, May 2, 8:52 p.m. Inappropriate
I do not claim to know, since it's outside my sphere of knowledge. I'm in the mood for a Rioja, but I'm sure Swift would have had some good suggestions. Chianti, perhaps.
Posted Wed, May 2, 9:29 p.m. Inappropriate
While I agree with much of your defense of Mr. Palmer's article -- there are certainly enough bicyclists who flout traffic laws, particularly in downtown Seattle, and sometimes quite brazenly (I understand that it's considered a badge of honor among bicycle messengers to have broken a limb on the job), there is enough over-the-line content in this article to provoke exactly the sort of negative comments that you've seen.
>> There is a legitimate case to be made that some bicyclists are arrogant and dangerous themselves, and Greg Palmer just made it.
Yes he did. Unfortunately, that's not all he did. Read:
"Hit one of these transgressing pedalers and that's the breaks, bicycle
boy – government's on my side, as long as I didn't have to jump the curb
to get you. And even then, I'm OK if I catch a judge who drives a Buick."
Note that in this context, Mr. Palmer means "transgressing" in the sense
of a bicyclist "on a road otherwise occupied by cars".
You can label this satire, or a joke, all you wish. You might even mean it (and I expect that you do). But the fact is that it's deplorable.
Several bicyclists are killed by motorists every year in Seattle. And there are people out there who won't realize this is satire, or will see portions of this article quoted out of context and agree with its more reprehensible declaratives, people who deeply resent the presence of bicycles on "their" roads, and who might be encouraged to do more to display that resentment than they're already doing. I've seen motorists go out of their way to force bicyclists off the road, and if you use your bicycle on a regular basis, I would be mildly surprised if you hadn't, too. These motorists are far from the majority in Seattle, but then the "arrogant" bicyclists overgeneralized in this article are far from the majority, too.
Don't make the problem of bicyclist safety worse. People are already dying out there.
John C. Todd, Jr.
Greater Greenwood Bi/Ped Safety Coalition
Posted Wed, May 2, 9:43 p.m. Inappropriate
Of course...but are -all- bicyclists (auto drivers/former Seattle Weekly writers) the same?: As an editor, you should know better! In Greg's piece - and most any journalistic piece - the broad brush is dangerous. Of course, there are dangerous bicyclists...and dangerous auto drivers, bus drivers, pedestrians, former Seattle Weekly staffers, and former King 5 reporters. Is everyone in any of these groups the same? Hardly. Sorry, but his article is sloppy, and comes across more like some crotchedy, Andy Rooney-esque tirade from the old "60 Minutes" ("You know what really bugs me in life? Paper clips. A fella could choke on those darn things..."). It's simply Palmer's pet peeve about the few (like Dick Cheney might say, "bad apples"). I hope you'll revisit your personal impressions posted here, and consider any similarities. (Side note: I do like your short piece just posted on McKay and the veiled threats he received; wish it were longer.)
Posted Thu, May 3, 6:54 a.m. Inappropriate
Greg L. Palmer
Lesser Wallingford Quadra-Wheel Safety Coalition
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:05 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: An editor and rider defends his writer: I think there's evidence in this list of comments that many didn't the joke. Perhaps you should reconsider your opinion.
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:08 a.m. Inappropriate
People...GET A LIFE!!! If you cannot or willnot look yourself in the mirror and see what others see and have a laugh about it, then find a therapist or something. Sheesh!
This town is so full of prissy prigs it's not funny...which is my point exactly. We're all so quick to excoriate anyone who dares utter a contrary opinion or hold another POV, so when someone as prototypically Seattle as Greg Palmer expresses in obvious jest what a lot of people think and feel, he gets pounced on like a piece of fresh meat in a lion's den. Give me a break!
As a red state conservative bagpipe playing kind of guy, I live each day having to ward off the slings and arrows of outrageous Seattleisms. Shall I give you lessons??? Truly sophisticated people in truly sophisticated communities celebrate their quirks, they aren't thin skinned about them. Maybe there's a secret here...the veneer of our sophistication is very thin; at heart this is a bumpkin town full of bumpkin people who really regard themselves as rubes and hicks when compared with others, so we fall all over ourselves in apoplectic paroxysms anytime anyone dares point out that we might be wearing white socks with a tuxedo.
I didn't agree with much of what he said - he liked William O. Douglas, I think Douglas was the worst justice ever on the US Supreme Court - but ol' Emmett Watson would have had a field day with bicycles and the whole bicycle culture. Frankly, I think he would have formed a Lesser Seattle sub-committee devoted to eradicating them from town, what with their imperious behavior and attitudes.
And Ivar Haglund would have had a sign down on Pier 54 at the foot of Madison Street: "We serve no bicyclists here. Keep clam!" He suffered no fools.
The negative responses to Greg's really funny piece represent political correctness at its worst. All I can say is that this ol' Piper appreciates what he wrote, had a lot of laughs because of it, and resolves to screw his courage to the sticking place and buy a bevy of corduroy sportcoats (can't wear one with my kilt, though...that's too English) just to show my support!
Can anyone direct me to Lundquist-Lilly?
Have a laugh on me...no charge!
The Piper
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:36 a.m. Inappropriate
"It's a guide to local and regional news, a place to report and discuss news, and a platform for new tools to convey news." This seems to be one of the duller tools in the shed.
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:42 a.m. Inappropriate
Res ipsa loquitur.
The Piper
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:53 a.m. Inappropriate
Huh? I thought this was supposed to be humor. But now Crosscut's editor says this was a "legitimate case" that Greg has made. Really? This is a legitimate case being made here? So Crosscut really does think pedestrians should attack cyclists who use the sidewalk? Wow. You guys are, uh, kind of angry. And you can't seem to make up your mind if you're doing satire or serious journalism.
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:56 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: Thought: Piper, you miss my point. I would have loved to have had a laugh.
Posted Thu, May 3, 8:56 a.m. Inappropriate
Exagerated Sense of Entitlement: An exagerated sense of entitlement is but one of the many similarities between bike riders and gun owners.
Posted Thu, May 3, 9:03 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: xagerated Sense of Entitlement: ratcity wins.
Posted Thu, May 3, 9:18 a.m. Inappropriate
You made the choice, not me. Greg was both funny and perceptive. The best laughs we have should be the ones occassioned by looking at ourselves in the mirror. I get one every morning!
Cheers and chuckles, mate...
The Piper
Posted Thu, May 3, 9:20 a.m. Inappropriate
Hmmm...How about a gun-owning, bicycling dentist??? Now isn't that a frightful thought???
The Piper
Posted Thu, May 3, 10:48 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: This piece seems to beg for flames from actual bicyclists: Well said!
Posted Thu, May 3, 10:54 a.m. Inappropriate
The piece was a joke, of course, and my thanks to those who got the joke and said so. And my apologies to those who sincerely didn't get the joke. As Chuck Taylor correctly observed, the piece was a joke, but as such pieces should be, it was based in some fact. Of course the overwhelming majority of bicycle riders are courteous, obey traffic laws, and call their mothers regularly. The piece wasn't about them, but about the others, who we've all seen and endured, bicyclists, drivers and pedestrians alike. But because it was based in fact, I guess it was possible to misinterpret my intent. (It was especially easy to misinterpret my intent deliberately. See below.) For those who didn't get it, I was no more seriously advocating drivers attacking bicyclists than I was seriously advocating a 37-mile long one-way bike path that ends in the Tacoma Dome parking lot. (I should have thought the latter would have cast doubt on the legitimacy of the former.) So please don't attack anybody on a bicycle, if you were pondering doing so and just waiting for a column in Crosscut to justify your criminal activity.
Finally, to those of you who CHOSE not to get the joke so you could beat your chests or whimper (and in a few cases, beat your chest and whimper at the same time, which isn't easy), I leave you with the words of the late great movie monster Harry Cohn: "Don't even ignore ‘em."
Happy motoring, happy pedaling, and happy birthday, Niccolò Machiavelli.
Posted Thu, May 3, 11:25 a.m. Inappropriate
Why should we not save there lifes? Why should we not protect them by BANNING them from all roads and SAVE there lifes? I do not want bike cyclists like me to die! So don't let me ride next to cars. Then we don't have to steam-shovel money to build bike death lanes (and can have money to buy steam LITE RAIL CHOO CHOO TRAINS!).
Did I mention the Big Bike Rider Himself Gorge Bush and IRAQ? He is like AEROGANT BIKE RIDER ON GIANT EVIL BIKE DEATH LANE! WASTE OF TRANPORTING SPENDING! Why are we in that war? Maybe bike riders want to go ride there? But that would be stupid. They could get killed.
Thank you Mr. Greg Palmer. You are rite. But you are not funny.
Sin Seerly Yours,
Someone who has nearly killed cyclists he never saw, and who was once nearly killed while riding a bike by someone who never saw him.
P.S. My favorite Christmas present was the red Raleigh I received when I was ten. I rode it to school and back on the street every school day. Lots less traffic then. Cycling in heavy traffic is intrinsically deadly and dangerous. That's why cyclists get mad, their lives are at stake. That's why they shouldn't be allowed on the roads. Their lives are more important that riding in the street.
Posted Thu, May 3, 11:41 a.m. Inappropriate
Too bad you just couldn't help yourself. Thanks, though, for sharing your remarkably sharp wit with the rest of us. Watch out Tom Swift!
Posted Thu, May 3, 11:51 a.m. Inappropriate
As satire, it misses the mark, because it's far too close to the majority opinion of the populace. Most people in cars view bikes as illegitimate users of the road. Johnathan Swift the author is not.
Using the standard trolling point system:
*Point score*
Novel suggestion that bikes cause traffic: 5
Mention of sidewalk riding: 5
Threatened violence: 6
Erroneous talk of gas taxes paying for roads: 5
Working in pedestrians: 5
Excellent spelling and grammar [1]: 10
Mentioning law breaking of cyclists: 5
Studiously avoiding lawfulness of car drivers: 5
Forgetting to call bikes 'toys' [2]: -8
Gratuitous bit about bikes on freeways [3]: -3
No comparison to communism/socialism: -4
12 lb helmet [4]: 3 bonus points
Total: 34
A pretty good troll score overall, but I really feel like Mister Palmer can do better if he tries very hard.
[1] ] A well formatted post makes less people recognize you as a troll and can quite often net you a big fish. Bravo on the decent line lengths.
[2] Really, that's just laziness.
[3] Your post would have been better without it really. Don't confuse people with facts.
[4] I love the image of the pink streamers. I really liked that particular bit.
Posted Thu, May 3, 11:53 a.m. Inappropriate
RE: Hard to Laugh: Sharp reply, you sure showed me. I think you mean Jonathan Swift. He's the one who wrote all the Hardy Boys adventures.
Posted Thu, May 3, 12:05 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: That's All, Folks: i appreciate that you grace us with your presence in the comments. some "other" local blogs throw fire bombs out there and rarely make an appearance in the comment thread except to occasionally mock someone with a legitimate question.
Posted Thu, May 3, 12:08 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: Bemoaning the sad quality of trolling these days: too cool for school.
Posted Thu, May 3, 12:15 p.m. Inappropriate
please remember I had a cousin who was killed in a plane crash
Me, too.
so please, no humor about airplanes or plane travel
That's not what I'm asking, and I doubt that's what anyone else here is asking, either. What I'm asking is that you think twice about abusing your privilege to print widely-read jokes about causing the plane crash yourself (while being safely elsewhere) just to injure or kill someone on it, because you think it might be "funny".
no humor about children, or food either, because of course thousands of people die each year choking, or accidentally eating poisonous foods
Again, that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking that maybe you ought to think twice about making jokes about choking the children yourself, or poisoning the food yourself.
You might want to add jokes about running down a pedestrian in a crosswalk or shooting at an American soldier in Baghdad to your own personal "over the line" list, too. Right up there with joking about how great it was in the old days when you could freely plow into a biker on a city street without fear of legal liability.
Which is exactly what you did.
Do you understand the distinction?
Posted Thu, May 3, 12:23 p.m. Inappropriate
It may, however, save a life. And that life might be my own. Or one of my neighbors, friends, or children. Or fellow sane, safe bike riders.
Posted Thu, May 3, 3:09 p.m. Inappropriate
We need to get along and follow the golden rule. Think of Fulghum's book about what we learned in Kindergarten.
Serious tangent:
We have a transportation crisis due to a failure to price the limited access highways. Systemwide dynamic tolling would be a great policy step. We also have a maintenance and funding crisis. A $2 per gallon increase in the federal gas tax would be a good first step. Oilman Bush imposing it would be like Nixon going to Red China. The revenues could fund new sidewalks, infrastructure maintenance, and improved roads and transit. It would help rebuild after Katrina and Iraq. It woud send a powerful price signal to firms and households and help with land use and global warming.
Posted Thu, May 3, 3:20 p.m. Inappropriate
Yup. Too many cars.
Sorry to give away the punchline, but some people are clearly humor-impaired.
So, everybody, do your part to reduce traffic congestion: ride a bike to work.
Posted Thu, May 3, 3:40 p.m. Inappropriate
And I'm supposed to be delusional? You sir, labor under a weight of delusion I find almost astonishing.
Wanna know who really incites dangerous behavior? The monthly Critical Mass rides downtown, during which bicyclists brazenly break the law and create a danger to themselves and unfairly create liability for motorists who are minding their own business.
I find the number of cars who run the red light near my work on Elliott to be a much more significant imposition of liability than Critical Mass could ever hope to be.
I will try and remember your high minded contempt every time I am forced to wait on the curb on 15th Ave NE as driver after driver after driver blows through the intersection without even acknowledging my right-of-way.
Posted Thu, May 3, 4:28 p.m. Inappropriate
The Piper
Posted Thu, May 3, 7 p.m. Inappropriate
good one: I have enjoyed the lengthy brouhaha over the Palmer bike satire. The article itself is one of the first I have read on Crosscut that I wanted to copy and send to friends. It is really excellent satire, and in spite of some claims, it is very Swiftian, not only in its manner but in its ability to bring out the anger of those without a sense of humor. Only a determined blindness could miss the satirical stance, right from the beginning. And all the responses so critical of GP are ample proof of the worst trait of the virtuous bike community, the humorless arrogance of their moral superiority. Bikes are great, fun, useful tools. Too often, though, the careless, law-flouting biker risks his own expendable life at the same time he puts other citizens in danger of having to live a traumatic experience caused by a speeding, weaving, latte-drinking, cell-phoning, red-light running anti-carbonist on two wheels. Very funny, Palmer. Good work.
Posted Thu, May 3, 10:41 p.m. Inappropriate
Thanks large.
Greg
Posted Fri, May 4, 7:05 p.m. Inappropriate
Mort
Posted Fri, May 4, 7:12 p.m. Inappropriate
unctuous \UNGK-choo-us\, adjective:
1. Of the nature or quality of an unguent or ointment; fatty; oily; greasy.
2. Having a smooth, greasy feel, as certain minerals.
3. Insincerely or excessively suave or ingratiating in manner or speech; marked by a false or smug earnestness or agreeableness.
Personally, I like 3. You?
The Piper
Posted Sat, May 5, 12:29 a.m. Inappropriate
BICYCLIST, 21, DIES OF ACCIDENT INJURIES
A bicyclist who was struck by a vehicle Thursday in Kent died Friday at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle.
The 21-year-old Salt Lake City man was crossing Southeast 208th Street near 120th Place Southeast at 1:45 p.m. when he was struck by a Ford Explorer, said King County Sheriff's Sgt. John Urquhart. No arrests have been made and deputies are investigating.
A second bicyclist who was behind the victim wasn't hit, Urquhart said.
Both men, who were wearing helmets, are missionaries with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Posted Sat, May 5, 1:42 a.m. Inappropriate
Given cycling in traffic is intrinsically dangerous, I don't see how anyone can impute blame for cycling deaths to Greg's satire. His article--which was extremely funny--is simply an intentionally exaggerated response to a perceived reality. Riding in traffic will cause some cyclists to die. By a convoluted sort of logic, I can argue that urging others to ride in traffic causes more cycling deaths than do humorists writing about riding in traffic. I could make that argument, but I won't. So please, Don't Shoot the Humorist.
Just because I don't think cars and bikes mix well, doesn't mean I don't think making cities bicycle friendly is a good idea. Here's a good article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal about what they're doing in the Europe and Scandanavia to achieve such ends:
Building a Better Bike Lane
Bike-friendly cities in Europe are launching a new attack on car culture. Can the U.S. catch up?
By NANCY KEATES May 4, 2007; Page W1
Here's an excerpt on safety:
As bike lanes become more crowded, new measures have been added to address bike safety. A recent survey found that people in Denmark felt less safe biking, though the risk of getting killed in a bike accident there has fallen by almost half. (The number of bicyclists killed fell to 31 in 2006 from 53 in 2004, and the number seriously injured dropped to 567 from 726 in that period.) According to one emergency room's statistics, the primary reason for accidents is people being hit by car doors opening; second is cars making right-hand turns and hitting bikers at intersections; third is bike-on-bike crashes. Bike-riding police officers now routinely fine cyclists in Amsterdam who don't have lights at night.
Also, here are a couple of links to places where you can see special bikes and trikes suitable for carrying kids and groceries:
">http://haleytrikes.com/
http://www.catoregon.org/hpm/longhaul4kids.htm
Worth a look see.
Posted Sat, May 5, 12:32 p.m. Inappropriate
RE: Don't Shoot the Humorist: Stuka, I certainly don't blame Greg for these accidents. And, yes, his writing is funny. What concerns me here is ignorance. Greg is, as his editor Chuck Taylor said, expressing a common sentiment. What neither seem willing to acknowledge is that this kind of humor merely serves to bolster a viewpoint that endangers cyclists. Satire certainly has its place and can serve a useful purpose, but Greg's approach is unlikely to have any positive impact. Will it make drivers even more angry and reckless around bikers? I hope not. But I can't see how it will help make anyone safer. It just seemed like an angry diatribe at an easy target. I just hope they don't become easier targets.
Posted Sat, May 5, 1:02 p.m. Inappropriate
What is it with everyone that humor has to have some social utilitarian prupose? How about humor simply as entertainment or serving to point out to us our foibles and flaws? Just how Puritanical is this town??? I mean it's always had a Carrie Nation quality to it, but this whole blather about bicycles is getting ridiculous!
Here's a thought: given that Puritanical, "We know far better than you what's good for you" rhetoric that passes for thinking in this town, I'm surprised that there isn't a clamor to ban the damn things outright! I mean if the risk is as great as all the enthusiasts claim, then they should be outlawed as a public risk and menace; they're unsafe at any speed!
Doesn't the reasoning that beats its fist on the table for gun control, no smoking in public places (I voted for it, BTW), junk food-free zones around public schools, no Coke machines in public schools, and the like absolutely scream for the elimination of this killer two-wheel menace? I'll bet ol' Tim Eyman would jump on this...except you probably all want to ban him as a public menace, too, right?
Who among you will circulate the first petition? You can count on me to support you if for no other reason than to put a figurative whoopie cushion on the bicycle seats of all you gloomy Gus types.
If you can't laugh at yourself and the figurative spinach that's in your teeth, then your lives are sorry indeed.
The Piper
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.