[*BCM*] Solidarity Rides, Not Critical Mass

[Schimek, Paul]

Hi BCMers:

I don't agree with Critical Mass as generally practiced but I'm a
stronger believer in Solidarity Rides. Demonstrate to motorists that
bicyclists belong on the road--and follow the rules. Demonstrate to
bicyclists that you can ride safely in the city--and have fun and
socialize with other bicyclists. (In fact I organized such rides in
1998, back before the current round of CM restarted. My only lasting
influence was getting the start changed from Government Center to Copley
Square.) You plan the route in advance and include re-grouping points.
The name "Solidarity Ride" comes from the DC Couriers:
http://www.dccourier.com/dcbca/solidarity.htm. I agree with their
description of the purpose of Solidarity Rides: "an effort to promote
cycling . . . and to build a sense of community" among cyclists. . . .
The rides are meant to increase public awareness of cyclists on DC
streets, not to clog traffic. We ask that groups take only one lane of
traffic and leave the others to cars as impeding their progress home
will only infuriate commuters and defy the purpose of the rides."

One technical point: the City of Boston has an ordinance that requires a
permit for any "organized formation of persons or vehicles." This means
that you and a friend can't go for a walk without a permit, technically.
It's a poorly written law. It should apply only to such events that will
require suspension of the traffic rules. (You can read the whole text on
http://cityofboston.gov/transportation/pdfs/rules.pdf, Article VIII, top
of numbered p. 25.) If it were properly written, then a Solidarity Ride
would not need a permit, but a typical Critical Mass would.

Another technical point: Massachusetts is one of only 4 states that
severely limits riding other than single file (you can only do it when
passing -- so just pass very slowly when riding two abreast). (The
proposed Bicyclist's Bill of Rights would fix this.) On Boston streets
with more than one lane where the right lane is not wide enough for a
motorist to safely pass a bicyclist without changing lanes (which is
most of them), bicyclists two abreast do not cause any more delay, if
they cause any at all, than a single cyclist riding safely away from
opening doors on parked cars. So I think it's quite reasonable to take
up a whole lane -- and until we fix the law, just always remember that
you are slowly passing the bicyclist to your right or left.

In addition, I think there is a place for civil disobedience rides to
point out unjust prohibitions on bicycling. For example, we should do a
ride up and down Washington Street in the South End to protest the
"Right Lane Bus Only" and "Do Not Enter MBTA Vehicles Only" signs. (By
the way, the T promised in writing that the lanes would be for
bicyclists and now says that bicyclists are supposed to ignore these
signs--but bus drivers do not necessarily know this.) Maybe we should do
the ride by being civilly obedient and riding in the general traffic
lane, not the bus lane.

Another idea: a Solidarity Ride on Memorial Drive and maybe the
Columbus/Tremont Speedway in honor of Peter Rowinsky and Scott Jenney
and all other bicyclists who have been arrested for the crime of riding
a bicycle where it is legal to ride.

--Paul Schimek
League Cycling Instructor #422
Director, Charles River Wheelmen
Formerly, Bicycle Program Manager, City of Boston
Formerly, President, Massachusetts Bicycle Coalition
Formerly, research analyst, U.S. Department of Transportation