[*BCM*] this guy...

[Ari Pollak]

On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 13:39 -0400, Mars wrote:
> I wouldn't consider that to be advocating anything. He's saying that
> cyclists are going to have to realize that perhaps the reason we don't
> get the respect we deserve on the road is because WE don't respect the
> road. He didn't say, "Who caress if bikers die, they're annoying". I
> feel like people are over-reacting to this guys comments because it's
> not what people want to hear.

I think the point is that he's trying to justify bikers getting killed
and injured because not all of them obey every motor vehicle law. "You
didn’t say whether she was obeying motor-vehicle laws at the time.
That’s key. Most bike riders in Boston, for example, run red lights. Did
she?" Why does that matter here? The original article said nothing about
the driver being at fault, nor did it try to place blame on anyone. So
unprompted, "this guy" is trying to justify a biker dying because she
may not have been obeying every law. I certainly would encourage all
bikers to wear helments, but I'm not about to imply that the girl
deserved to die because she may not have been wearing one.

The irony of the letter is incredibly thick. "What do they care if mere
pedestrians suddenly turn and get maimed by 200 pounds of rolling steel?
Yet they expect the public to care about them." How often do pedestrians
get killed by bikes? And yet, most Boston drivers do the very thing
Robert is blaming bikers for. The BPD caught 30 drivers in the span of 1
hour who didn't stop for a woman & baby in a crosswalk
(http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/13376798/detail.html).

Who's being discourteous to whom here?