September 14, 2011

Okay, Fine, It's War

Cyclists are dying, collisions are rising, and people who claim that there is a "War on Cars" are out of control—it's time for a reality check and an action plan.

James Yamasaki

Tools

A Manifesto: We Fight Because We Must

A specter is haunting Seattle—the specter of a War on Cars. All the powers of Old Seattle have entered into a "holy" alliance to win this war: Seattle Times publisher and city council president, columnist Joni Balter and developer Kemper Freeman, Rainier Club regulars and suburban slobs.

Where is the advocate for increased bike and pedestrian safety who has not been branded an anti-car "militant"? Where is the politico who has not used the "War on Cars" rubric as a tool for demonizing the nondriving classes, for marginalizing our city's walkers, bike riders, and mass transit users?

Stranger Personals

The mindless repetition of this "War on Cars" falsehood—by car advocates harboring a phony, self-serving sense of victimhood—has led to a situation in which this "War on Cars" is acknowledged by most Seattleites to be real. Because of this regrettable specter, it is high time that cyclists, pedestrians, and their transit-riding comrades openly publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of a "War on Cars" with a manifesto of and by the nondrivers themselves:

I. The car-driving class must pay its own way!

For cars we have paved our forests, spanned our lakes, and burrowed under our cities. Yet drivers throw tantrums at the painting of a mere bicycle lane on the street. They balk at the mere suggestion of hiking a car-tab fee, raising the gas tax, or tolling to help pay for their insatiable demands, even as downtrodden transit riders have seen fares rise 80 percent over four years.

No more! We demand that car drivers pay their own way, bearing the full cost of the automobile-petroleum-industrial complex that has depleted our environment, strangled our cities, and drawn our nation into foreign wars. Reinstate the progressive motor vehicle excise tax, hike the gas tax, and toll every freeway, bridge, and neighborhood street until the true cost of driving lies as heavy and noxious as our smog-laden air. Our present system of hidden subsidies is the opiate of the car-driving masses; only when it is totally withdrawn will our road-building addiction finally be broken.

II. All power to the people's transit

If Seattle is to become a people's paradise, our buses, rail, streetcars, and ferries must stretch into every neighborhood, running reliably, affordably, and at all hours of the day and night. Since mass transit serves the masses, the mass of our transportation dollars must hereafter be spent to meet its needs.

III. The pedestrian and bicycle classes must be protected. And served!

The history of transportation is the history of struggle between the drivers and the nondrivers whose lives and limbs have literally been crushed. Between 2000 and 2009 in King County, 19 cyclists and 238 pedestrians lost their lives to cars, while injuries sent another 423 cyclists and 1,656 pedestrians to our hospital wards for two days or more after being hit by cars. If there is, in fact, a "War on Cars," then the cars are winning—as a look at recent headlines confirms. Saturday, September 10, brought the death of a young cyclist in the University District, and Sunday, September 11, brought the death of a woman biking on the Olympic Peninsula while wearing a helmet and a bright protective vest. Both were killed in collisions with cars.

The bikers and walkers, which neither slurp government dollars nor consume natural resources at the pace of the drivers, demand safer streets and sidewalks. As the Economist suggested on September 3 when responding to Seattle's spate of recent cyclist deaths, cars on streets with bike lanes must be subjected to "traffic calming" methods already used in European capitals like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and Portland. When cars must slow down below 20 miles per hour, they kill less than 5 percent of collision victims. And the busiest bike lanes must be physically protected from the four-wheeled instruments of death through concrete buffers, rows of trees, or other barriers. In some places, whole streets—yes, whole streets, we have plenty to spare—must be closed to cars, creating bike and pedestrian malls and paths of the kind found throughout more forward-thinking, class-conscious cities.

We make these demands because, unfortunately, we must. Our epoch, the epoch of the car, possesses this distinct feature: It has created a simplified antagonism. Seattle as a whole is now more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly fighting each other—car driver and nondriver.

This antagonism traces directly to the creation of the modern car driver, a privileged individual who, as noted, is the beneficiary of a long course of subsidies, tax incentives, and wars for cheap oil. But the same subsidies that created this creature (who now rages about the roads while simultaneously screaming of being a victim in some war) can—and must, beginning now—be used to build bike lanes, sidewalks, light rail, and other benefits to the nondriving classes.

People Are Dying

September 11: About three miles west of Port Angeles, a Mercury Sable driven by a 65-year-old woman struck a woman riding her bicycle along Highway 112, according to the Peninsula Daily News. The cyclist had been wearing a helmet "and a neon-yellow safety jacket" when she was hit from behind. She died from the injuries.

September 10: Robert Townsend, 23, was delivering a sandwich for Jimmy John's just after 6:00 p.m. Riding his bicycle south on University Way Northeast, he collided with a Hyundai Sonata that was coming from the opposite direction and turning left onto Northeast Campus Parkway. "As far as I could tell, the car's windshield was hit pretty hard and there was a terrible pool of blood in the middle of that intersection," says witness Tyler Brown.

Townsend soon died at Harborview Medical Center, according to the Seattle Police Department. The driver was not cited at the scene, and a final determination of fault could take months. "For us, this is as serious as a murder," says SPD sergeant Sean Whitcomb. "About the same amount of care and detail goes into this type of investigation."

But the cyclist likely had right-of-way southbound on University Way Northeast. There are no green arrow lights that would give the Hyundai driver a free left turn onto Campus Parkway. Whitcomb confirms what most road users already know: "When two vehicles going the opposite direction have a green light, typically the one that is making a turn must yield to oncoming traffic."

Pete Marino, the Illinois-based spokesman for Jimmy John's, says the company requires its delivery riders in Washington State to wear helmets—and, Marino added, "Robert was wearing one at the time of the accident."

July 28: Mike Wang, 44, was riding in the northbound bicycle lane on Dexter Avenue North in the late afternoon when an SUV struck Wang, killing him. The driver then fled the scene. Wang was wearing a helmet at the time.

July 22: John Przychodzen, 49, was wearing a helmet and riding on the shoulder of Northeast Juanita Drive traveling to his brother's house for dinner in Kirkland when a truck struck and fatally wounded him.

Collisions Are Rising

Chris Davis, an attorney who specializes in representing cyclists and pedestrians hit by cars, says the number of those cases coming to him "has been increasing steadily over the last couple years." Typically, he's had one dozen to two dozen of each type of case annually. But recently his number of such cases climbed by 20 to 30 percent.

Why more cases?

In part, Davis credits more cyclists on the road—including some who "ignore laws." Also out there, Davis adds, are more "ignorant motorists to endanger cyclists." Yes, confrontational cyclists can contribute to the problem, Davis says, but he thinks that overall "anti-cyclist sentiment" is the major factor in the increase in cases he's seeing.

"Motorists will become frustrated and crowd bicyclists and not give them enough room, come up on the bicyclists fast and out of frustration," he says. "The frustration translates into actions, sometimes intentional acts against the cyclist."

Davis's experiences—more injuries, more clients—appear to be borne out by citywide data that shows more collisions.

According to the Seattle Department of Transportation's 2007 bicycle and pedestrian collision report (which appears to be the most recent such report produced by the city), the number of collisions between bicycles and vehicles showed an uptick over six years. While there was an average of about 275 collisions per year from 2002 to 2005, that number rose to an average of 349 per year in the next two years (roughly a 25 percent increase). The following years were also up, according to separate data reported last month by the Seattle Times. The newspaper reported an average of 328 collisions per year from 2008 to 2010.

Fatalities from bicycle and car collisions have also risen: The city report shows only two fatalities in the four-year span from 2002 to 2005 (half a fatality a year on average, as macabre as that may sound). But over the next five years, according to the city's and Seattle Times' reports, bicycle collisions resulted in 10 fatalities. That is, on average, four times as many fatalities a year. And that average is borne out again this year, where as of last Saturday, two cyclists had been fatally hit in Seattle.

Talking Heads Are Spewing Violent Rhetoric and Claiming Victimhood

At the same time cyclist collisions and deaths have risen, the anti-bicycle rhetoric has grown more divisive and violent. Who is behind it? Consider the words of Michael Cornell, chair of the Green Lake Community Council.

"Bicyclists are militant and looking to cause a conflict whenever they can," he said at the group's community meeting on January 12 in the company of Seattle City Council member Tom Rasmussen. Seattle spends volumes more on car infrastructure than on bicycles or pedestrians, yet Cornell has complained of the "radical agenda against cars," saying, "I call it the war on cars and the people who need them," and describing the pro-bicycle agenda as a "war waged on people who drive cars."

So cyclists are all militant.

They're seeking out conflict.

They're specifically waging war on drivers.

And... now there's an uptick in drivers killing them.

Go figure.

But Cornell is hardly alone in ramping up the anti-bicycle-rider rhetoric.

Seattle Times columnist Joni Balter is equally divisive, if not as inflammatory. "Increasingly, cars are being shoved aside," Balter wrote in a recent editorial, "as evidenced by efforts to jack up commercial parking rates, the constant plea for more light rail, and significant transfer of asphalt to bike lanes." Shorter Balter: Funding non-car infrastructure is an attack on drivers... the same illogic some Christians use to claim same-sex marriage erodes the traditional penis-in-vagina kind. According to the US Department of Transportation, the number of passenger vehicles on the roads has increased by four million since the 1960s, yet always the victim, Balter bleats as if cars are an endangered species.

In a cavalcade of logical fallacies, Balter uses the Seattle Times as a platform to instigate more anti-bicycle sentiment. For instance: "Every new bike lane can make a road less appealing to a car or a truck. Bicycles prevail, freight mobility takes a sorry hike" (false dilemma). Also: "Bike and pedestrian lobbies, whose efforts began before the arrival of [Mayor Mike] McGinn, are already getting improvements that infuriate some motorists" (association fallacy). She asks "whether this group of citizens can impose their will on the rest of the place" (argumentum ad populum).

Cars are being forced off the roads, Balter insists (falsely), and oooh, it just makes her so angry! And she's hardly alone.

Portland radio host PK on Jammin' 95.5 pushed the pedal to the metal in 2006, announcing: "If you are a cyclist, you should know I exist, that I don't care about you. That I don't care about your life," the blog Bikeportland.org reported (the station never released an archive). "When I hear on TV that a cyclist has been hit and killed by a car, I laugh, I think it's funny."

While some people foment anti-cyclist rage, others are content to merely blockade spending on transit infrastructure. Seattle's prime non-mover-and-shaker is city council president Richard Conlin, who twice in 2010 voted to suspend the city's Transit Master Plan, thereby delaying rail planning. Conlin was also the city's chief advocate for a $4.2 billion deep-bore tunnel that lacks transit, and was for years a leading voice to stop the monorail project. And last year, Conlin advocated advancing construction on the new, wider 520 bridge in an effort to head off transit advocates from tweaking the design to accommodate light rail.

His pro-roads/anti-transit agenda lumps Conlin in with some rather unsavory company: the right-wing think tank Washington Policy Center, which has claimed that "Seattle's war on cars is a war on drivers"; Fox News, which relentlessly drums up the "Seattle's War on Cars" meme; and wingnut local blogger Stefan Sharkansky, who takes aim at Mayor McGinn for "punishing people for driving."

All the sort of violent rhetoric that can't help but have a violent end.

In Reality, We Are Outspent

If money is ammunition in the war on cars, then cars have most of the firepower. The pie chart above cites the city's spending on various transportation projects. Only $18.4 million—about 7 percent—of the Seattle Department of Transportation's $270 million in expenditures last year was dedicated strictly to bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Another 6 percent, approximately, goes to transit, such as paying for buses in the downtown ride-free zone. But the vast majority of the city's transportation dollars—more than 85 percent—is dedicated to projects that solely fund vehicle infrastructure (such as parking programs) or primarily fund vehicle infrastructure (such as the Spokane Street viaduct and other major road construction). While the latter may include some pedestrian or bicycle amenities, the projects primarily serve cars. "It is false to argue that there is a war on cars," says SDOT spokesman Rick Sheridan. "When you consider the spending on road building, maintenance, traffic signs, and signals, we spend a significant percentage of our budget on vehicles."

Sometimes Bikes and Transit Win

Wallingford resident Doug stepped outside his home on August 26 to discover that city transportation workers had painted a giant bicycle on his street. "I now live on a giant bike path," he said. "We are winning the War on Cars!"

Indeed, between 2000 and 2009, car use declined in Seattle by 7.7 percent, according to the American Community Survey. During this same period, transit use increased 10.9 percent, biking increased an astounding 59 percent, and walking increased 4.4 percent. US Census data shows that in 2009, nearly 40 percent of Seattle's population walked, biked, bused, or carpooled to work. That number is only going to increase as the city becomes easier to navigate without a car.

For instance, voters approved a funding package in 2008 to extend light rail north to Northgate and east to Redmond. Two years prior, Seattle voters passed the nine-year, $365 million Bridging the Gap levy, applying a parking-lot tax that funds transportation maintenance and improvements. Since then, the Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) has added roughly 180 miles of bike lanes to city streets and a series of green "bike boxes" that give cyclists right-of-way at signaled intersections. In 2009 alone, SDOT added 26 blocks of new sidewalk to city streets, 40 new "countdown" crosswalk signals, and repainted more than 800 crosswalks. In the last few years, several road diets have eliminated vehicle lanes and replaced them with bicycle thoroughfares on 125th Avenue Northeast, Stone Way North, and other streets around the city—despite the protests of petulant neighbors who bray as if their freedom were under siege. Meanwhile, a First Hill streetcar connecting the International District to Capitol Hill is set to begin its circuit in 2013.

All the while, gas prices are rising and parking rates costs are increasing. The carless commuters see victory on the horizon.

The Heroes

Our heroes are fueled not by petrol, but by the inspiration from King County Council member Larry Phillips, who pushed past a phalanx of suburban Republican lawmakers to approve a $20 car tab fee this summer that will save commuters from a 17 percent cut in bus service. To put that victory in perspective, consider this: Metro's average monthly ridership is up 3 percent from 2010. (In May alone, the number of weekday bus and van trips exceeded predictions by 22,115.) "The best thing King County can do to recover the local economy is to keep buses on the streets so that people can get to work," Phillips says.

He isn't our only trailblazer—Wallingford resident Cathy Tuttle is head of the group Spokespeople. She's leading Seattle's "greenway movement" to convert select nonarterial roads that connect neighborhoods into dedicated bike routes, where driving is discouraged. In 2009, Tuttle wrote a grant asking the city to turn 44th Street, between I-5 and Stone Way North, into a greenway. Her grant was awarded last year and Seattle's first greenway will be open to riders by the end of November. Now at least five other groups in the city are organizing to build greenways in their neighborhoods.

Others can't be left out: Seattle City Council member Nick Licata is a tireless advocate for the city's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, which call for adding new sidewalks, crosswalks, and over 450 miles of new bike lanes to city streets by 2017; Representative Jamie Pedersen (D-43) pushed through a vulnerable roadway users bill this year that imposes up to a $5,000 fine and 90-day license suspension on drivers who kill other road users. And it goes without saying that behind all this is the invisible hand of the Cascade Bicycle Club.

But perhaps our greatest mmm-asscot is Seattle City Council member Mike O'Brien's perky ass, honed from 10 miles of bicycle commuting every day (O'Brien's ass has only bused to work three days since taking office in January 2010). One of O'Brien's goals is creating a dedicated bike route, like a cycle track, in downtown Seattle. "I don't know what street makes the most sense," he says, "but right now, it's a little scary downtown. There's a huge gap for new riders between what's possible and what we have today."

Keep your quarter; O'Brien's ass is so tight you could bounce a brick off it.

FacebookShare

Comments (194) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

Thank you, especially for calling out the fomenters of the vicious rhetoric that's getting us killed.

Posted by TVDinner

on September 14, 2011 at 9:23 AM · Report

Classic. I can't say my impression of O'Brien's ass is anything like yours - he's a nice fellow and a lovely council member, but a middle-aged pudge is a middle-aged pudge.

Posted by gloomy gus on September 14, 2011 at 9:23 AM · Report

I enjoy misconstruing II for the image of ferries reaching every neighborhood.

Posted by YoungBS on September 14, 2011 at 9:34 AM · Report

There's a lovely section in Lewis Mumford's The City in History where he describes the advent of superfast (in that era) wheeled conveyances in European cities during the Enlightenment. Carriages with one or two horses might go faster than the people walking in the streets, but once you could hook up four or six horses you could go a lot faster. And that's when the street changed. Suddenly the aristocracy could literally mow down the non-wheeled masses in their way, and they did so with alarming frequency. Dickens describes this phenomenon movingly - if a bit hamfistedly - in A Tale of Two Cities.

I mention Mumford's book especially for gloomy gus, because if he hasn't read it I think he'd enjoy it immensely. You can read large chunks of it on Google Books, gus, if you want a preview. It's truly marvelous.

Posted by TVDinner

on September 14, 2011 at 9:45 AM · Report

Nary a mention of the benefits of car ownership. How odd.

Posted by JF on September 14, 2011 at 9:52 AM · Report

BIKE HIPSTERS DESERVE TO GET HIT.

Posted by a non hipster on September 14, 2011 at 10:03 AM · Report

When this town can get more than 40 bikes attending a Critical Mass, you can start talking about Wars and Manifestos. That shit could/should absolutely shut the city down -- as it does in many other cities -- and it will show that you mean business. It works, it shows unity, it shows you won't be pushed around and it's EASY. Get your asses out there.

(and for what it's worth, I don't own a bike and only drive to the grocery store.)

Posted by MasMadness on September 14, 2011 at 10:07 AM · Report

When Critical Mass stops being a bunch of douchebags who intentionally break traffic laws maybe they'll get more people to join them.

Posted by TMN on September 14, 2011 at 10:42 AM · Report

@7: I don't think Critical Mass helps. They only perpetuate the idea that cyclists see themselves as somehow immune to traffic laws. Tactics like plugging intersections so they can ignore red lights, and occasionally engaging in violence against people who honk at them, don't aid the cause.

It would be much better, I think, to style a protest along the lines of the ones that motorists staged during the 55-mph speed limit years -- get a bunch of cyclists together and studiously follow every single traffic law, even when doing so slows down both them and general traffic flow.

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 10:45 AM · Report

@masmadness, 2,378 bicyclists were hit last year by people driving to or from the grocery store. (though, almost all were those driving from the grocery store. The thought of popping in a couple Hot Pockets in the oven caused drivers to ignore everything but the gas peddle).

Those Critical Mass bike events only piss people off. And definitely not in a "gosh these bikers are really trying to get a point across" kind of way. It's more of a " if these fucking assholes don't get out of my fucking way I'm going to go Road Warrior on these pussies" sort of way.

Posted by growler on September 14, 2011 at 10:50 AM · Report

Being a pedestrian all the time, I do want to know how many of the pedestrians hit were walking against the light. It's a gripe I have had about pedestrians, and to preempt some of you, no, I have never jaywalked, honestly. I'm the one you see standing at the corner when a cop is directing traffic waiting for the officer to acknowledge and wave the pedestrians through specifically. I'm the one that will stop when the light is flashing unless there's more than 5 seconds available (when that's shown, if not I just stop). I'm also the one that ... well ... drags my hand along cars pulled into the crosswalk in the hopes that I scratch it on accident .... because there's no way to avoid that and stay in the crosswalk. I'm the one that will take the few extra steps to get to a crosswalk even though I am going straight across the street, in areas there are crosswalks. So yeah, I do have room to gripe. Jaywalking is literally putting your lives in the motorist's hands and most motorists are horrible drivers. So yeah, how many were jaywalking, though I feel sorry about the toddler I have seen parents with infants jet across the middle of a busy street and that sickens me.

Posted by KittenKoder

on September 14, 2011 at 10:53 AM · Report

Thanks for the suggestion, TVDinner! I'm the sort of lazy bum who read Jane Jacobs' delightful scoffing at some Mumford ideas but was too incurious to pick up the man's work my own damn self. I'll give it a go.

Posted by gloomy gus on September 14, 2011 at 10:56 AM · Report

Awesome call to action. Loved your city expenditures on transit graph.

Posted by BombasticMO

on September 14, 2011 at 11:00 AM · Report

It's not as simple as your drivers vs. non-drivers dichotomy. You people assume that everyone who uses transit or rides a bike doesn't own a car, and that people who own cars never get around town by any other means.

That's probably true among the employees of the Stranger. It's not true of the city at large. But go ahead, keep casting every car owner as some evil predator who hates bikes and buses. Throwing more dumb rhetoric at a problem always makes it better.

I own a car and am happy to pay for the privelege. I also own an Orca card, a nice bike, and three pairs of good walking shoes. Getting around town doesn't have to be an either/or thing.

Posted by Hernandez

on September 14, 2011 at 11:18 AM · Report

Critical Mass neither helps nor hurts the local cycling climate. The effect of Critical Mass on infrastructure and laws is erratic and almost readily dismissed. Compare relative "mass" of each city's CM and you'll notice that some cities with robust networks have Critical Mass in just the same tempo and visibility as cities that have little in the way of bike networks.

What CM *does* do is connect cycling activists from time to time, even if alliances are only as long as the legislative session that spawned them.

So that's that. And now, manifesto time:

To the article, I want to just point out that y'all forgot Senator Kline. Say what you will about him (you already do), but he did successfully pass the Vulnerable Users Bill in the Senate, which was surprisingly easy in a surprisingly rough climate.

Ultimately this entire article and all our arguments are pointing to one pressing need -- safe routes and streets for all. If we're going to demand that person pays more or this person needs a license or these people should get less service or that sidewalk is more important, we need to be prepared in the same breath to say that a comprehensive move to enhancing safety and circulation for everyone needs to be passed.

We absolutely need to tap our limited funding for something that works on infrastructure so that when service changes force person A into a car from time to time, the few times they drive are smoother and don't conflict with buses, pedestrians and cyclists at the current rate we're seeing. We need to invest in a way that makes person B more excited about those days they can leave the car at home, bike to a bus stop, latch onto a speedy downtown-bound bus and cross streets safely. And person C should be able to get their kids to school without having to drive 6 blocks.

In reality, everyone outside of the Baltersphere is just trying to get home. This trumped up climate of putting cyclists and drivers and pedestrians in a cage and telling them to fight is dragging Seattle down. No other battle has upset our local politics more than this push to cause strife among neighbors and friends based on how they get from Point A to Point B. This fight is just another way to keep people from seeing our real needs: a comprehensive transportation system for all of Seattle. It's the reason we're left with a revenue stream we had to finesse with legislation in order to make it a more progressive option -- the pressure to keep Seattle from spending on a more robust and functional transportation network is simply against making it easy.

I'm willing to call a truce right here and right now if we can actually do something constructive, even if it means we're only doing it to flip off Joni Balter. This means recognizing the need to pay for infrastructure improvements this year, pushing to shift that revenue stream into a more broad and far more progressive one and finally dropping this trumped up and faked diversion that stalls needed investment and delights Balter and Blethen. We need to drop this fight.

The fight has blinded us so much we're actually running each other down in the streets.

So let's work to make streets for ALL Seattle residents. No more of this "$50,000 paint bucket" or "why does X neighborhood get nice traffic circles" or other meaningless ranting. Let's proceed with what we have, guide it, finesse it, build now, fix, correct and make everything work better for everyone, from revenue collection to expenditure, from center lane to sidewalk, from Lake City to Delridge.

For ALL of Seattle.

*drops the mic*

More...

Posted by Baconcat on September 14, 2011 at 11:19 AM · Report

I'm a long time bike rider in this town, and I'm pretty sick of this sanctimonious nonsense. It's not a lifestyle, or a statement. This town has steep hills, narrow streets and it rains. A lot. Biking will NEVER be a decent commute alternative here - even if the participation doubles, over 90% of workers will still have to use our 'public transportation system', or drive their cars.
Again, I'm a biker myself, but give me a break! I'll happily pay a reg fee to the city each year to build new bike paths - why shouldn't we bikers pay for it? Immature tirades about class warfare will might work for the Stranger readership, but we're not the only ones that live here. Get real and stop bleating.

Posted by RRoland on September 14, 2011 at 11:20 AM · Report

Good to see progressives get so fired up about their uncommon yet somehow especially important mode of transportation. This will totally reach mainstream ears and attain mainstream appeal; everyone would love, in the longrun, to move a cyclist-based transportation infrastructure.

This totally isn't a drop in the bucket contrasted with the magnificent troubles this country is suffering. This totally isn't a problem predominantly relegated to wealthier white liberals.

Posted by Central Scrutinizer on September 14, 2011 at 11:21 AM · Report

If there's a war on cars, do we get to choose our own weapons? There's a spot next to the hook I hang my bike helmet on that would be ideal for a paintball pistol and holster.

And just because I never followed through on that vow to bring a pea shooter to the theatre in order to deal with talkers/texters/nonphonesilencers, don't assume I'm necessarily joking.

Posted by Fred Casely on September 14, 2011 at 11:22 AM · Report

The "War on Cars" is a "War on Bikes."

Posted by Just saying on September 14, 2011 at 11:22 AM · Report

Fuck it. Lets just rip out all of the roads.

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on September 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM · Report

Okay, maybe that would appear a little menacing. Suppose I combine the two ideas and bike with a paintball blowgun at the ready?

Posted by Fred Casely on September 14, 2011 at 11:26 AM · Report

@9/10...if bikers don't want to have them (C. Mass) they don't have to, what I'm saying is that going strictly on the ideology of the whole thing isn't going to work. Critical Mass is non-violent civil disobedience, and that's a better way to get this done. Not by talking about rights and wrongs ad nausea. Everything in this article is absolutely correct and perfectly logical, bicyclists have every law and moral angle on their side. But it won't get them anywhere.

Bicyclists get put in danger, harassed, run off of roads and picked on specifically because they are usually by themselves, and they can't do shit to a car other than dent a fender. Critical Mass takes that away. The "road warrior" fear is legit, unfortunately...but come on. More seniors have rammed farmers markets than drivers have gone crazy at Critical Mass.

http://en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Conflicts_i…

It's unfortunate that the rhetoric on the part of drivers has gotten so keyed up, but I still don't see someone committing mass cycle-cide because of a 10 minute wait at the light. In SF they block intersections for up to 45 minutes, once a month, with no more than annoyed looks. People, who do not ride bikes PLAN THEIR (4th) FRIDAY NIGHTS AROUND CRITICAL MASS, and understand exactly why they have to deal with it. Because people with bikes got tired of seeing their friends get killed.

Do what you want...all I'm saying is the ideas aren't going to save you on this one, and if you want to go that route, I don't want to hear about "war". It's the same old shit in a long-form essay...not exactly revolution sparking.

Posted by MasMadness on September 14, 2011 at 11:27 AM · Report

@15 *slow clap*

Keep being awesome, BC.

Posted by Hernandez

on September 14, 2011 at 11:27 AM · Report

@17:

This totally isn't a problem predominantly relegated to wealthier white liberals

If they were still around, I suspect that Wyndel Hunt, George Demendoza and Mike Wang – at least – would take issue with that.

Posted by Fred Casely on September 14, 2011 at 11:44 AM · Report

@16 My experience living in Munich runs counter to your forecast that hostile weather will prevent mass adoption of cycling for commuting.
Their gas prices went up, they blanketed their city with bike lanes, and so many people switched to bikes, even in hostile winters, that gridlock practically disappeared. (At least until FC Bayern wins an important match.)

Perhaps we should give infrastructure a shot.

@18 I've contemplated spurs. If respect for human life isn't motivation enough to give 3 feet, maybe fear for your precious paint job would be.

(I used to drive not only for transportation, but also for sport. But years of a car-free life led to an appreciation for the damage automobile dependance does to our culture. Recently, hostile driver behavior and the death of a friend easily dismissed with the "I didn't see him" defense has me ready to take up arms in this war.)

Posted by gerwitz

on September 14, 2011 at 11:52 AM · Report

Oh god...here we go again. I will prepare myself for feeling insulted by someone on this thread by virtue of my driving a car. At which point someone will defend my car driving ways with some extreme language, which will then prompt more extreme language. . .

Oh, and that's how this "War" started.

How about this for Manifesto:

If you are on the road, pay goddamn attention.

Posted by Pithy Name on September 14, 2011 at 12:05 PM · Report

@14: It's not as simple as your drivers vs. non-drivers dichotomy... But go ahead, keep casting every car owner as some evil predator who hates bikes and buses. Throwing more dumb rhetoric at a problem always makes it better.

QFT.

Posted by kitschnsync on September 14, 2011 at 12:05 PM · Report

I could care less about another war on anything. I bike commute and I drive. I think everybody except the .83 crowd does both. I see SUVs with Share the Road license plates all the time. I live on 51st in Wallingford, a street that gets a lot of surface car traffic when 50th backs up (all the time). As a bike greenway with residential car traffic it would be a lot safer for the people who live there. I think I'll join Spokespeople and see if we can't make that happen. That seems reasonable. As for your war or the car-people's war or any other war, I'll pass.

Posted by LiberatusQuirkus on September 14, 2011 at 12:16 PM · Report

The age of Us Versus Them ... welcome to the modern era.

Posted by KittenKoder

on September 14, 2011 at 12:16 PM · Report

Dear Stranger,

Stop lumping pedestrians with bikers. We walkers are threatened more by bike-riding miscreants not paying attention than we are by drivers, who are at least predictable. The morons you are egging on by this article are only getting dumber as time goes on. Get off your soapbox.

Thanks,
The Pedestrians of Seattle

Posted by wilbur@work on September 14, 2011 at 12:16 PM · Report

And, Hernandez FTW.

Posted by wilbur@work on September 14, 2011 at 12:19 PM · Report

In this 'war on cars', only bicyclists are dying.

Posted by a biker/driver on September 14, 2011 at 12:26 PM · Report

@22: Critical Mass is non-violent civil disobedience...

Uhm, no.
http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/07/last…

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 12:33 PM · Report

Oh good. Another war on something. Those always work.

Posted by I like to read on September 14, 2011 at 12:34 PM · Report

@30

Sorry, but the statistics do not support your statement. Hundreds of pedestrians have been killed on our streets in the last ten years. How many were killed by cars and how many were killed by bicycles?

Posted by emor on September 14, 2011 at 12:39 PM · Report

Cyclists are to pedestrians what motorists are to cyclists.

My dog and I are regularly terrorized by inconsiderate cyclists as we walk along the Mountain to Sound path. One of these days there's going to be a terrible accident where one or both of us will wind up in the hospital or worse.

More often than not, cyclists ride their bikes like motorists drive their cars. It's all about them. They think they own the path or the road.

The problem is not what vehicle (bicycle or car) one is operating, but the selfishness and rudeness of the operator.

Posted by dr_dick on September 14, 2011 at 12:45 PM · Report

@35 While I agree that cars hurt more, being killed isn't the only injury. A collision with a cyclist may not kill you but there is a high chance of serious harm, by narrowing it to only deaths you are showing bias. Anyone who thinks that lifetime pain from an injury is just not important is really heartless to. But, the number of collisions is probably about even when you include them all if you base it on percentage of drivers and percentage of cyclists. Again, it's not one or the other's problem, it's everyone that needs to start being safer.

Posted by KittenKoder

on September 14, 2011 at 12:46 PM · Report

Posted by dr_dick on September 14, 2011 at 12:47 PM · Report

I drive, I bike, I walk. I'm at war with myself!

Posted by Mason on September 14, 2011 at 12:52 PM · Report

Wang's death pisses me off the most out of all of these, primarily because the fucking cowardly piece of shit driver ran away. But it also pisses me off because sensible, safe people don't take dangerous turns like that, and it personally scares me that, as a driver, I have to share the roads with such craven morons. How much longer before that brown SUV kills someone else?

Posted by keshmeshi on September 14, 2011 at 1:03 PM · Report

RRoland @16: Uh, you already do pay for bike infrastructure. In fact auto drivers in Seattle are subsidized by bicyclists. Seattle roads, bike lanes and bike paths are paid for primarily through sales taxes and property taxes, which everyone pays, and which cyclists pay a disproportionate amount of. A bike registration fee would be inefficient to enforce and expensive to implement, and is a bad idea.

Posted by DOUG.

on September 14, 2011 at 1:06 PM · Report

I notice that attorney quoted in the article wrote a book on bicycle accident law in Washington state. http://www.washingtonaccidentbooks.com/w…

Posted by MissShell on September 14, 2011 at 1:06 PM · Report

@41 - I'm curious. How do bicyclists pay "a disproportionate amount" of sales and property taxes vs. motorists?

Posted by Pithy Name on September 14, 2011 at 1:19 PM · Report

"In a cavalcade of logical fallicies," The Stranger once again fails to thoroughly investigate and report facts on all sides of an issue and instead emphasizes only the opinions that support its tired and supposedly progressive platform. Good thing you're not taken seriously as journalists.

Posted by Drive. Walk. Ride. Bike. on September 14, 2011 at 1:25 PM · Report

Also, @ 41, not everyone pays property tax.

Posted by Drive. Walk. Ride. Bike. on September 14, 2011 at 1:27 PM · Report

@45 everyone pays property tax except clergy. You don't have to pay it directly out of pocket; renters most certainly pay it as a part of their rent.

Posted by Joe Szilagyi

on September 14, 2011 at 1:40 PM · Report

Do folks in wheelchairs count as pedestrians or bikes? I saw a woman in a wheel chair get knocked over by a car turning right (but looking left) at a red light.

I am for more bike lanes that way I know where I should be and where they should be.

Posted by Anthropomorhpise Me on September 14, 2011 at 1:45 PM · Report

Most rents are not high enough to factor in property taxes. Some rents may be high enough to account for it, but far from all. So no, not everyone pays property tax except clergy.

Posted by Drive. Walk. Ride. Bike. on September 14, 2011 at 1:47 PM · Report

@5 People know the benefits of car ownership.

Posted by beansarelame on September 14, 2011 at 1:53 PM · Report

@48 OK, you win the internets. Hurray!

Posted by Joe Szilagyi

on September 14, 2011 at 1:55 PM · Report

Oh gee, are people here just copying/pasting comments from past threads?

"When this town can get more than 40 bikes attending a Critical Mass, you can start talking about Wars and Manifestos"

You realize that CM has been going on for nearly 20 years here? Many rides have consisted of hundreds and hundreds of riders. If you really think that the 100+ rides have all had less than 40 riders I'd love to see your proof.

Posted by stinkbug on September 14, 2011 at 2:02 PM · Report

@43: Cyclists pay property and sales taxes at the same rate as motorists, but the amount of infrastructure built for cyclists and the impact cyclists make upon that infrastructure (i.e. potholes) is much, much smaller than that made by a motorist. Therefore, cyclists pay a disproportionate amount for the roads they use when compared to motorists.

Posted by DOUG.

on September 14, 2011 at 2:05 PM · Report

DOUG @41 will make up any shit he wants to and pull it out of his ass at any time to score gotcha points on blogs. Most people are on to his game.

Posted by Only douchebags spell their names with all caps on September 14, 2011 at 2:07 PM · Report

@46 even non-profit foundations?

Posted by Will in Seattle

on September 14, 2011 at 2:21 PM · Report

@48- So how do you think landlords pay their property taxes? They're not operating at a loss.

Posted by dwightmoodyforgetsthings

on September 14, 2011 at 2:26 PM · Report

@48: Technically, the rent has to be high enough to factor in property taxes, because otherwise the landlord would be losing money. It's a cost of doing business for him/her. When you pay rent you're paying your share of your landlord's property taxes, their mortgage, and their maintenance costs.

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 2:28 PM · Report

@52: You're assuming (a) that these cyclists do not also own cars, and (b) that they don't take public transit or patronize businesses that get their goods shipped in by truck.

The fact is everyone benefits from the road network. Without roads there wouldn't be a city to complain about.

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 2:30 PM · Report

I love my car and don't bike much. But I am totally with the bikers on this. Car drivers should pay their own way. And know how to drive.

Posted by notfromaroundhere on September 14, 2011 at 2:30 PM · Report

@25: Munich is also flat (it's farther from the mountains than most people think). I've been living in Berlin for about 3 years now and while the weather here is totally shitty, it is also completely flat. If you threw a few Queen Anne/downtown sort of hills in Berlin, I bet you would lose the vast majority of your cyclists. And even my most dedicated cycling friends resort to the taking the commuter train when the weather turns.
But I do have some problems lumping pedestrians with cyclists. First off--look at those numbers! Who are the people who are really being slaughtered by motorists? Secondly, I had many, many problems dealing with cyclists while being a pedestrian in Seattle (I lived there for about 3 years), both when I was running for fitness and when I was walking to/from work or running errands. Cyclists also need to own up to bad behavior.
Sometimes I do find myself driving around Portland and Seattle when I go back to visit friends/family. I always try to be careful and double-check for a cyclist before making a right turn, pulling out of a driveway, opening a door, etc. I would LOVE it if there were streets dedicated to cyclists. Portland doesn't dedicate entire streets, but there are streets I know are heavily utilized by cyclists and I avoid them at all costs. Usually it makes absolutely no difference anyway, as these streets tend to be little side streets running parallel to the major arteries. It seems to me that having dedicated bike routes that are clearly marked so cyclists can use them and motorists can avoid them is definitely the simplest solution.

Posted by ephemeroptera on September 14, 2011 at 2:31 PM · Report

@52 - Well, at least I can see your logic. Even if I don't agree with it.

The same argument can be said that motorists subsidize buses and light rail, and pay for your bike lanes due to gas taxes, license fees, etc.

But really, it's a silly argument. I WANT to pay for those things. As a motorist, I want more public transit, bicyclists, etc. Less congestion. Less pollution. Less wear and tear on the roads. And it benefits my community. Who gives a shit who pays more of a share? EVERYONE BENEFITS.

Posted by Pithy Name on September 14, 2011 at 2:33 PM · Report

"European capitals like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and Portland"

Which European country is Portland the capital of??

Posted by yolfer

on September 14, 2011 at 2:34 PM · Report

@59: I think maybe the whole idea of mixing motor and bicycle traffic is incompatible with the idea of having bicycle commuting catch on with the masses. And not just because people are afraid to ride in traffic. Safely riding in traffic requires keeping the speed difference between you and the cars to a minimum, which means riding fast. Even in favorable weather it's almost impossible to do this without being a sweaty mess when you arrive at your destination. If you're basting in your own juices under rain gear it's even more miserable.

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 2:39 PM · Report

@61: Portlandia. Duh.

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 2:40 PM · Report

Orv @57: "The fact is everyone benefits from the road network. Without roads there wouldn't be a city to complain about."

I totally agree. My main point was to the guy @16 who seemed to think that cyclists didn't pay for roads.

Posted by DOUG.

on September 14, 2011 at 2:40 PM · Report

@60: Point taken. It's the notion that cyclists are transportation freeloaders that I'm trying to refute.

Posted by DOUG.

on September 14, 2011 at 2:43 PM · Report

'Bout time. Should of started this back in the 70's when the USA went from a net exporter to net importer of oil. ¡Sî se puede! Teach your kids that walking is cooler than driving - walk with them to run the errands and to play outside on the weekends. Yes, walking takes longer (especially with little kids), but it must be done. Good luck!

Posted by Mrs Jarvie on September 14, 2011 at 2:47 PM · Report

I hate you all, equally.

Posted by meanie

on September 14, 2011 at 2:47 PM · Report

Do folks in wheelchairs count as pedestrians or bikes? I saw a woman in a wheel chair get knocked over by a car turning right (but looking left) at a red light.

Pedestrian. Simply being in a vehicle isn't enough to qualify as being one. People in wheelchairs act as pedestrians (sticking to sidewalks and crosswalks) and should therefore be treated as such.

Posted by keshmeshi on September 14, 2011 at 3:03 PM · Report

@66: Well said, Mrs. Jarvie! I walk or ride the bus where I live on the days that I don't drive, and am grateful that the local streets are still pedestrian friendly. It appears that in Seattle, they are not.

Hmmmm....how to visit Seattle anymore without driving, taking public transportation, or walking (I don't own a bike)......that's a toughie.
This escalating Battle of The Right of Way is just plain sad.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 14, 2011 at 3:09 PM · Report

@69: The U District is still the most pedestrian friendly place I've ever been. I found out real quickly that trying to wait at the curb for a gap in traffic just confuses drivers, who stop and then wonder why you haven't started crossing yet.

Posted by Orv on September 14, 2011 at 3:12 PM · Report

@68: Depends. Are they using a motorized wheelchair/scooter? How fast can it go? Are you talking about Seattle or other places?

http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2009/04/cycl…

Posted by stinkbug on September 14, 2011 at 3:12 PM · Report

An old Chicago saying "go play in traffic", like many things that happen everyday that politypiggys and punks alike act like it never happens we can say we are just like Portland and just what part of "You are going to be road kill" did You not understand?

Posted by slade

on September 14, 2011 at 3:17 PM · Report

The irony of this article appearing in the paper today.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/world/…

Posted by Nuclear Marc on September 14, 2011 at 3:20 PM · Report

Drivers have the responsibility of being extra careful because they are running through highly populated areas in a giant hunk of metal at high speeds. All infrastructure currently bows to the car, so they ought to have a little courtesy in return.

Bikes have the responsibility of being extra careful because they are sometimes stealthy and hard to see and hear coming. They ought to help drivers and peds out by being consistent and law-abiding. Use a bell, reflectors, lights.

Pedestrians have the responsibility of paying attention and defensive walking when you encounter a street, and realize that sometimes a bike needs to be on a sidewalk due to unsafe streets. Don't assume anyone can see you, walk as if you are invisible, because in some conditions, you might be.

EVERYONE needs to be more understanding and realize that all kinds of people drive, walk and bike and we all deserve a break once in awhile.

EVERYONE needs to put away the smartphones while moving, regardless of mode of transport. I would bet that almost every accident these days involves someone not paying attention to the road and their surroundings because they are texting.

Be safe all...

Posted by funnylittlemunki on September 14, 2011 at 3:39 PM · Report

The article compares the number of fatalities for cyclists, but doesn't include the other data that's necessary to evaluate. How many bicycle-miles were there in the compared years?

For a true comparison, how many fatalities are there per mile, or even per cyclist on the road? Is there any net change in the number of accidents (including non-fatality)? How about car traffic? More? Less? Fatalities or accidents per mile driven in the city?

Statistically, the numbers you're talking about (four times as many) are worthless.

Posted by J from Minneapolis on September 14, 2011 at 6:36 PM · Report

Thanks, Stranger!

Fresh from your support of the Boy Mayor (approval rating 23%), and your opposition to the tunnel (approved by 60%), you declare a War on Cars.

This ought to go well. See you in November. You know, that new $60 car tab fee? What will you say when the voters of Seattle fart in your direction?

Posted by Mister G on September 14, 2011 at 6:39 PM · Report

Most cyclistas are poor white kids with a bad attitude, and are jealous of people who can afford real wheels.

Posted by Mister G on September 14, 2011 at 6:49 PM · Report

Would better driver education help? Would better enforcement help (both for disobedient riders and cars)?

First, I find that most drivers are, in fact, adequately considerate towards riders. But, even if only 1% aren't, that still creates quite a danger.

I'd like to see serious penalties if a driver comes within 3' (or 5' on faster roads) of a cyclist. And, I'd like to see some of these laws, like that one, incorporated into the driver's test.

Posted by pragmatition on September 14, 2011 at 6:50 PM · Report

Oh hell yeah.

Seattle is the most enlightened place I've lived as far as shared roadways, but there's still a long way to go. It blows me away every time a car buzzes me just to race up to a red light. Do drivers not realize the total lack of equivalency in outcomes? You hit us, we die. We hit you, you get a dent. Is human life really so cheap that you're willing to risk it for the chance to get home thirty seconds faster? Are you going to be able to live with yourself for the rest of your life knowing that you killed someone?

We are doing this city, including its drivers, a FAVOR by biking. We make the snarling traffic better. We make the air cleaner. We make this a more progressive, attractive place to live. We lower the demand for gas. And the thanks we get are fucking existential threats from distracted fatties in their cars on a daily basis?

Nope. Time to get into the 21st century. Respect human life. And that goes for bikers, too--don't do dumb shit and definitely leave the sidewalks for the pedestrians.

Posted by mattluby

on September 14, 2011 at 7:04 PM · Report

It's only seven sentences in length, but here's an editorial from the Seattle TImes in 1942 that discusses the increase in deaths of bicyclists:

http://classifiedhumanity.com/post/10226…

Posted by stinkbug on September 14, 2011 at 7:10 PM · Report

@76- You're really jealous, aren't you?

Posted by dwightmoodyforgetsthings

on September 14, 2011 at 8:18 PM · Report

There is a simple solution to all of this: tax gas to at least five bucks a gallon.

Then sit back and watch this city's attitude change to alternative transportation.

Government is for the future, and cars are clearly the past.

Posted by shallow figures on September 14, 2011 at 8:26 PM · Report

Hay deutche bag hipsters ... just because your fixed wheeled bikes are trendy does not mean you're really against cars. After all, years from now (when you inherit the trust fund) you'll need roads to drive on (hopefully electric cars).

In the mean time, it is worth asking the retards who run the Cascade Bicycle Club why they did not advocate grade separation in Seattle's Bicycle Master Plan? Mixing cars and bikes on arterials was fucking stupid.

Posted by Old Time Seattle on September 14, 2011 at 8:55 PM · Report

@70: Thanks. That's good to know.

@74: Well said! That all makes sense to me.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 14, 2011 at 10:55 PM · Report

I live in a big house and drive a big car, I burn gas for fun, make 500K a year and laugh at the sorry plight of you downtown baristas living on top of each other like ants and pretending it is some kind of super-utopia.
I know you hate me, and I don't care.....now chop chop, make me my coffee you little peon.

Posted by SpicyBaconator on September 14, 2011 at 11:04 PM · Report

Glad to see that moronic "War on Cars" rhetoric get the treatment it deserves. While everything in this manifesto is great, here's a few more ideas for improving traffic generally (I do not own a car, although I drive occasionally for business).

-- Eliminate most on-street parking. This fouls traffic (I live on Capitol Hill, and on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights, pedestrians are in great danger -- those drivers are looking for parking spots, not pedestrians) and takes up precious pavement space. Also, when I ride a bike, I always wonder why drivers act like they can't see anything. Then, when I drive, I find my view constantly blocked by parked cars. That small change in elevation, from the bike seat to the driver's seat, means a lot when the view is cluttered with parked cars.

-- Synchronize the goddamned traffic lights already. As far as I can tell, the ONLY properly timed streets downtown are Second Avenue, Fourth Avenue, and Stewart Street. Pike Street downtown is an especially bad route, as every light seems to turn red as the driver or cyclist approaches. If the town of Astoria, OR, can time their main drag at 20 mph (and put up actual signs informing the drivers of this!) then so can we.

-- In keeping with the last point, eliminate on-demand lights. I drove up through the near-deserted Industrial District this evening, and my trip was five minutes longer due to random (from my perspective) changes in the lights on Fourth Avenue South. Traffic on the arterial waits 30 seconds for five seconds of traffic from the side street.

-- Ban Critical Mass, by enforcing the traffic laws. I've ridden around this town for twenty years, and my visceral reaction to Critical Mass is to wade in there swinging a truck tire iron. NOBODY owns the road! (I once watched smog build over Broadway as Critical Mass ground their way along, damming an ever-expanding clot of cars behind them. Ugly in many ways, none of them flattering to us cyclists.)

More...

Posted by tensor on September 14, 2011 at 11:49 PM · Report

I'll support bikes and bike lanes when they're paying a licensing fee (nowhere near as large as car tabs, but, you have to have a plate on your bike) so that those who ignore traffic laws can be tracked down. And when cops ENFORCE traffic laws with cyclists! There are too many cyclists that self-righteously ignore ALL traffic laws, then wonder why they get hit and killed. They seem to think they're above the law, because they can get away with it! I find it odd they expect only motorists to pay for the roads (despite the paltry amount paid by EVERYONE--NOT just cyclists-- through other means, such as property tax), yet insist they be given a chunk of it. It's like buying a pizza, and the cyclist wants the driver to pay for 3/4 of it, but they want half of it.
Then there's the self-righteous, "I'm GREEN, I'm not using fuel!" but you are...you're holding up traffic, causing all those cars behind you to burn MORE fuel. Bottom line is cyclists need to watch out for THEMSELVES, for they are squishy, and break easier than a 2-ton monstrosity of metal. Yes, egregious accidents happen at the fault of motorists, accidents between cars do daily, it's just more widely reported when it's car vs. bike because the cyclist is more likely to be horribly hurt in even the smallest accident. When they obey the rules of the road, not hold up traffic, and watch for themselves, get ticketed for offenses--THEN I will support them. It is not a viable option for me, living out of the area and needing to drive very far to doctors in Seattle, etc.

Posted by cattycat on September 15, 2011 at 3:02 AM · Report

Even when I ride a bike I get run over by other militant bicyclists.

Posted by iBear

on September 15, 2011 at 5:15 AM · Report

@80: Very cool. Thanks for the link!

Posted by TVDinner

on September 15, 2011 at 6:27 AM · Report

@87: You can't "track down" cyclists or motorists for minor traffic offenses. These are citation offenses, which means the officer has to actually witness the behavior to write a ticket.

Posted by J.R. on September 15, 2011 at 9:55 AM · Report

@cattycat
Then there's the self-righteous, "I'm GREEN, I'm not using fuel!" but you are...you're holding up traffic, causing all those cars behind you to burn MORE fuel.
No, we're not burning fuel, all those selfish(and there are only a few things more selfish then single occupancy vehicles in a metropolitan area) are burning fuel, to maintain there lazy, subsidized, unsustainable life style. Cars have there place, they are a very useful tool. The problem is how impractical and inefficient they are for getting around a city, not to mention dangerous.

Posted by tike0vitz on September 15, 2011 at 10:37 AM · Report

In Houston last year.. two firetrucks collided where one ran a red light and killed a cyclist waiting at the intersection. A bicycle painted white attached to a pole with fake flowers is a memorial in her memory..She was employee of a nonprofit org Houston Center Of Photography.

Posted by melissa noble on September 15, 2011 at 10:45 AM · Report

Cars and the private automobile will eventually go the way of the dodo. Can't you hear it blowin' in the wind? I certainly can. The signs are there. You can huff and puff, car drivers, but the winds of change are blowing in our direction, the bicyclists, walkers and transit takers. Enjoy!

Posted by Rocky Racoon on September 15, 2011 at 12:49 PM · Report

The problem is much deeper than Cars Vs. Bicycles. The problem is that many of us Americans are spoiled and immature brats. Similar to a sibling rivalry where one child throws a tantrum because their sibling got a better flavor of ice cream or cooler action figure.

The car folks panties are all wadded up because bikers get their own lane(gasp)Car folks are all butthurt because they see some bikers that don't obey the rules of the road.

Yet as they are driving their lethal 2 ton V12 Hemi they are chatting away on a cell or texting their Fantasy Football picks or even chugging an alcoholic beverage.

Bike folks got their spandex all chaffing up in their groin because car folks don't bow down to them. And in fact many car folks actually point and laugh at them in their brightly colored Spandex faux super hero outfits.

But the bottom line is that each side is as stubborn as a child and in such is right and the other side is a fucking idiot blah blah blah.

The problem is that many of us Americans are spoiled and immature brats and have very little respect for anything other than them or theirs.

Posted by Arturo Bandini on September 15, 2011 at 1:11 PM · Report

Jesus...hyperbole much? Here's an idea...since our gas taxes/tabs pay for the roads we use and the crap mass transit that everyone agrees needs to be improved (but no one wants to pay for), how about all bike commuters register an license their bikes to pay for bike lanes and better transit? We don't pay our share? Bullroar!

I want to see cyclists ticketed for not following traffic laws. I want to see an end to this "I'm traffic, now I'm a pedestrian, now traffic again" crap. I don't want a cyclist to just whip out in front of me because the other cyclist in front of him in the bike lane is going too slow for him. I can't do that on a single-lane road if the car in front is too slow. I want to see cyclists wait at lights and stop at stop signs like the rest of traffic. Use traffic ticket monies to help fund more bike lanes and improve transit.

I don't have good joints, so I can't bike. I won't use the buses because they are horribly inconvenient for me. If transit improves, I'd use it and gladly leave my car at home more. It's just not an option now.

Why can't cyclists be held to the same standards of legality as drivers? Why can't they help pay for these things they demand? Instead of fomenting an "us vs. them" attitude, try coming up with helpful solutions. Everyone should pay their fair share.

Posted by gormoth on September 15, 2011 at 2:41 PM · Report

Posted by gormoth on September 15, 2011 at 2:43 PM · Report

Oh boy, I don't even know where to start with this...

Posted by moo

on September 15, 2011 at 3:29 PM · Report

gormoth @95: Your gas taxes and car tabs do NOT pay for Seattle's roads. Seattle's roads are funded primarily through sales taxes and property taxes, which every cyclist pays.

Posted by DOUG.

on September 15, 2011 at 4:18 PM · Report

The hysterical language by the hysterical morlocks (who often tend to be auto supremicists) is, well, hysterical. I file the people who use the phrase "War on cars" in roughly the same place a with people who shout "CLASS WARFARE" at any attempt to address our nation's growing poverty gap.

In other words, keep throwing the word "war" around. I don't think it means what you think it means. Or rather, you don't want to fucking know what a "war" really is.

Posted by Soldier of Misfortune

on September 15, 2011 at 4:52 PM · Report

100

In other words, keep throwing the word "war" around. I don't think it means what you think it means. Or rather, you don't want to fucking know what a "war" really is.

Remember, the article that these comments are attached to declared war on cars. It's not real smart for the cyclistas to do such a thing. Two tons of steel beats 25 pounds of alumnium each and every time. You idiots want a war? Really?

Posted by Mister G on September 15, 2011 at 5:21 PM · Report

101

bicyclists must also be cited for refusing to stop at stop signs and red lights.

there are plenty of laws to keep us from accidently killing each other if we actually obeyed them.

Posted by Womyn2me $http://http:\\www.shelleyandlaura.com$ on September 15, 2011 at 5:28 PM · Report

102

@100 - When I roll up next to some entitled, bully asshole in two tons of steel and put five rounds into the asshole in the driver's seat, I win every time. Well, until I go to prison and end up becoming the Booty Warrior's best friend.

Okay, obviously what I just said above was stupid and wasn't serious, but it just goes along the lines of what I was originally trying to say - throwing around "this is war" is dangerous hyperbole. Sooner or later, some whacko will take the term seriously.

Posted by Soldier of Misfortune

on September 15, 2011 at 5:43 PM · Report

103

#102, your complaint should be with The Stranger, which titled the article, "Okay, Fine, It's War." They are the ones calling for a "war on cars" by the idiot cyclistas. It's a phenomenally stupid idea, but then The Stranger has been racking up a pretty long list of especially stupid crap lately.

Posted by Mister G on September 15, 2011 at 6:06 PM · Report

104

if you don't like the way i drive , get the fuck off the side walk !

Posted by whatsbeckgottadowithit on September 15, 2011 at 6:32 PM · Report

105

How about those elitist mother effing cyclists on the bike trails...no one talks about the damage and deaths(O yes!)those jerks get away with.

Posted by misssmartypants on September 15, 2011 at 7:25 PM · Report

106

#105, I've talked about them. The Burke Gilman trail is chock full of homicidal maniacs on bicycles. It's a disaster waiting to happen.

Posted by Mister G on September 15, 2011 at 10:56 PM · Report

107

The problem for Seattle is that it increased its density without adding a single new arterial.

Hence, for example, a neighborhood street like 45th in Wallingford is now the equivalent of State Route.

There are few if any East-West highways throughout the entire PNW region. There are none in Seattle proper other than the West Seattle bridge.

This results in huge numbers of cars pouring into neighborhood streets and making them virtual freeways but without any safeguards or separation between cars and bike-peds.

Contrast this with Portland, which has an abundant network of highways -- concentric rings of expressways and radial spokes. It's very easy to get to a highway entrance...jump on and jump off -- just like you'd expect in well planned city. However, in Seattle, just the opposite. People crawl through neighborhood after neighborhood. A journey of 15 miles around here can take an hour...even if there is no traffic...because you have to navigate through lights and stop signs.

Density is the culprit and lack of highways.

Want an answer. Look in the mirror...urbists.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe

on September 16, 2011 at 12:07 AM · Report

108

#107, do spend any time in Portland? I do, and it's mayhem down there. Cyclists and drivers are at each others' throats, and congestion is off the charts because they're refused to build freeways while making the city streets harder and harder to drive on.

The end result: The city Portland's economic growth has stopped. Any new jobs down there are created in the suburbs, which coincidentally are not involved in this cyclista nonsense.

Posted by Mister G on September 16, 2011 at 12:29 AM · Report

109

Contrast this with Portland, which has an abundant network of highways -- concentric rings of expressways and radial spokes. It's very easy to get to a highway entrance...jump on and jump off -- just like you'd expect in well planned city.

You obviously don't spend any time down there. The city of Portland is congested as hell, because they're refused to build freeways while at the same time making it harder to drive.

The result is that Portland's economy has stopped growing. Any new jobs in that region are created in the suburbs, which coincidentally are not part of the cyclista nonsense.

Posted by Mister G on September 16, 2011 at 12:34 AM · Report

110

Incredibly idealistic and heartfelt, but where was the call to action?

Posted by suddenlyorcas on September 16, 2011 at 8:19 AM · Report

111

Gee, Stranger, somehow your upfront message doesn't make me feel any safer. You call for war, when that's what we already have. How about a heartfelt call for truce? The data and the horror stories are useful, the implication of our superiority as biking humans not so much--you've spurred the same old venting. Nothing new going on here. I get from point A to point B safely on my own hyper-awareness and on the tenuous tolerance of my existence by people in big machines. You aren't helping.

Posted by Blaeloch on September 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM · Report

112

The factual part of this is useful. Calling for our own war, not too damn helpful. You have spurred the same venting and belligerence we always get when these things happen and the blame game has to be rerun. I was encouraged to hear Mayor McGinn's plan to try to address this, but your article puts us back in the same paradigm. How about calling for a truce, with both sides getting their act together?

Posted by Blaeloch on September 16, 2011 at 9:16 AM · Report

113

Great, so now the Stranger has decided to speak for all non motorists and sunk down to the other side's level in calling this a war. I don't know if you've noticed, but there are some psychos out there on the road who don't view cyclist's life as worth anything.

Public safety and transportation are issues that shouldn't be politicized. But unfortunately it looks like everything nowadays is devolving into an Us VS Them battle.

Posted by Rosss on September 16, 2011 at 10:41 AM · Report

114

Richard Conlin is STILL IN OFFICE? That guy has been useless for years, how does he get re-elected so much? Oh right because he's like an "environmentalist" or some shit like that?

I haven't lived in Seattle for over 10 years- it's amazing how little has changed in the zombie-like political system up there.

Posted by njudah on September 16, 2011 at 11:00 AM · Report

115

#111, excellent point. If I were a cyclist, I'd really be uncomfortable with The Stranger's ludicrous article calling for the legions of people on 25-pound aluminum vehicles to declare war on the much larger legions of people in 2-ton steel vehicles.

Posted by Mister G on September 16, 2011 at 11:10 AM · Report

116

Let's stop having "Wars" on things. It is not a very useful metaphor, and contributes to Us vs. Them thinking, which encourages divisive thinking generally.

I'm not at war with anyone. And yes, people on the roads should pay more attention and be generally more courteous to one another.

Posted by treacle on September 16, 2011 at 2:52 PM · Report

117

I'd like to see a pedestrian manifesto. Pedestrian needs are not the same as bicyclists needs. Every time I see a bicyclists not using bike infrastructure whizzing by pedestrians on the sidewalk, I get scared. Or when cyclists decide to use the crosswalk, instead of waiting at the light like a regular vehicle. I am happy to see cyclists lobbying, but we need to make sure people using their feet aren't handed the short end of the stick. We need bike infrastructural, safe cycling education for cyclists in urban areas, and pedestrian infrastructure.

Posted by Jame on September 16, 2011 at 4:11 PM · Report

118

This is why they should make all cars, truck and busses out of NERF.

Posted by elSapo on September 16, 2011 at 4:19 PM · Report

119

Are there any statistics about bikes hitting cars or pedestrians? Seriously.
I ride a Vespa and have done so for almost 30(!) years. I've been hit four times. Twice by cars (both times when some asshole does a u-turn without looking) and twice by bicycles, both times then I was legally taking a right (with my turn light on) and them passing (or trying to)on MY right, which is an illegal move.

And I've got a GREAT idea on how to fund more bike lanes and such; start ticketing bicyclist for not wearing helmets or running red lights and stop signs and use the money for the bike projects. No bicyclist can argue with that. I've gotten tickets on my scoot for doing the same thing...

Posted by kutis on September 16, 2011 at 4:20 PM · Report

120

#119, you fail to understand that bicyclists are better than everyone else, and therefore are above mere laws.

Posted by Mister G on September 16, 2011 at 5:18 PM · Report

121

DEAR FELLOW SEATTLE DRIVERS:

You will gain my respect when you are capable of parallel parking in fewer than 3 attempts.

Posted by Captain Wiggette on September 16, 2011 at 5:31 PM · Report

122

When do you find time to ride your bicycles between hugging trees and smoking pot? You all should be a lot more mellow one would think.

Posted by Seahawk17 on September 16, 2011 at 5:34 PM · Report

123

When do you people find time to ride your bikes so much in between hugging trees and smoking pot? Which also begs the question, why aren't you more mellow?

Posted by Seahawk17 on September 16, 2011 at 5:49 PM · Report

124

@119:

Are you seriously suggesting that bicycles pull across a lane of motorized traffic and pass cars on the left? I don't think that the solution is to simply expect bicyclists to conform to a set of rules that were written for cars & trucks. What we need is some proper infrastructure (grade-separated lanes, bike-specific signals at crossings, etc) - then we can start talking about rules of the road.

Posted by deadlyfingers on September 16, 2011 at 7:06 PM · Report

125

Hooooooooooooooooooooo boy......

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 16, 2011 at 7:52 PM · Report

126

War weapon number 1: a handful of roofing nails. When a motorist honks, yells, or swerves at me I toss the nails, to universally positive results:
1) Occasionally some go under the wheels of the attacker. Win!
2) Some hit the hard parts of the attacker's car. Maybe they'll remember that sound the nails made while waiting for AAA to change their tires and know: that kitty had claws.
3) Some of those nails will flatten tires of other drivers. "Innocent" drivers. Innocent...
A) Anyone who sees how few homicides perpetrated by motorists ever lead to charges knows there's no such thing as an innocent driver.
B) Given how much of my property and income taxes go toward funding highways my bike is prohibited from using, or giving billion dollar tax brakes for oil companies, motorists paying for a tow truck or new tire is a small price to ask. They still have a huge subsidy to drive.

A few flat tires are simple, HARMLESS, collateral damage.

4) If I should run over one of my own nails, I'm patched and rolling within 10 minutes.

So hear ye, all cyclists. Roofing nails are just a couple dollars a pound. Keep a handful ready, and another handful in your pocket. With practice you won't even need to stop to "reload". Believe me, after a while, cars slow down and pass distantly, quietly, and as far as I can see, respectfully.

Posted by Matt C on September 16, 2011 at 8:45 PM · Report

127

War weapon number 1: a handful of roofing nails. When a motorist honks, yells, or swerves at me I toss the nails, to universally positive results:
1) Occasionally some go under the wheels of the attacker. Win!
2) Some hit the hard parts of the attacker's car. Maybe they'll remember that sound while waiting for AAA to change their tires and know "this kitty has claws"
3) Some of those nails will flatten tires of other drivers. "Innocent" drivers. Innocent...
A) Anyone who sees how few homicides perpetrated by motorists ever lead to charges knows there's no such thing as an innocent driver.
B) Given how much of my property and income taxes go toward funding highways my bike is prohibited from using, or giving billion dollar tax brakes for oil companies, motorists paying for a tow truck or new tire is a small price to ask. They still have a huge subsidy to drive.

A few flat tires are simple, HARMLESS, collateral damage.

4) If I should run over one of my own nails, I'm patched and rolling within 10 minutes.

So hear ye, all cyclists. Roofing nails are just a couple dollars a pound. Keep a handful ready, and another handful in your pocket. With practice you won't even need to stop to "reload". Believe me, after a while, cars slow down and pass distantly, quietly, and as far as I can see, respectfully.

Posted by Matt C on September 16, 2011 at 8:50 PM · Report

128

@119:

"[I was hit] twice by bicycles, both times then I was legally taking a right (with my turn light on) and them passing (or trying to) on MY right, which is an illegal move."

Ummmm, yeah. That's called a "right hook", and it comes from a motorist getting about 5 meters ahead of a cyclist, pretending that the cyclist no longer exists, then slowing and turning taking the turn right into the bike's path.

In the future, understand the cyclist doesn't just disappear the second s/he's slightly behind your peripheral vision. Unless you're prepared to take that right at 30 MPH, slow down, let the cyclist pass straight across the side street, then look in your side mirror, then turn. My bike and I are 0ve 300 lbs combined, you DO NOT want to right-cross me on a scooter!

Posted by Matt C on September 16, 2011 at 8:58 PM · Report

129

@87:
"I'll support bikes and bike lanes when [they] have to have a plate on your bike) so that those who ignore traffic laws can be tracked down."

Really? So how are those license plates working out for the four American citizens killed every day by hit and run drivers? Not so well, huh.

I'll support license plates, registrations, taxes, etc. for cyclists when all cars have black boxes, GPS trackers, automatic-stop for red lights and speed governors controlled by speed-limit signs. You want to improve roadway safety, start with the vehicles proven to kill 100 people a day, every day for the last thirty years. Once you've solved that you can chase those terrorizing cyclists.

Oh and add to tha suite of safety tools, a beacon bikers/peds can carry that makes all cars slow to 20 MPH when within 50 feet. Oh and airbags on the outside of cars, to dampen the impact of car-on-people collisions.

How do you like them apples?

Posted by Matt C on September 16, 2011 at 9:26 PM · Report

130

Roads have gotten a lot more dense and congested since I started riding in Seattle 25 years ago. It's not the same as when I used to Zip through red lights and ride against traffic for a block to make a short cut; more traffic, more risk. The Burk-gilman trail also seems to be a stupid magnet for bike riders, I won't use it anymore because of the congestion. As the simple act of travel becomes a source of frustration, war begins. Seattle drivers don't even know how to merge on the freeway, much less yield the right-of-way to bikes\peds. It's not personal, they just can't conceive of putting your need before theirs; an attitude born in happier days of fewer people, open roads. To help this transition of attitude I suggest this tactic: for every bicyclist wounded or killed by a car, a random act of violence be committed to a car by each bicyclist the next day. Nothing like a kryptonite to the taillight to get the point across, randomness is the key.

Posted by pdonahue on September 17, 2011 at 9:27 AM · Report

131

A major problem, only briefly mentioned, is that bicyclists are very unaware in Seattle. I grew up in Lafayette, Indiana, where EVERYONE drives. I learned at a very, very young age that I had to assume that NO CAR EVER SEES ME AS A BICYCLIST. Riding around, I made sure of a few things: 1. Always make eye-contact with a driver that may be crossing your path. 2. If you need to slow down and stop to get out of the way of a car that doesn't seem to be paying attention, SLOW YOUR ASS DOWN AND STOP. 3. The most dangerous situation you can be in is when you're on the right side of the road and a car is getting ready to turn either left or right in front of you. Again, ASSUME THAT THE CAR DOES NOT SEE YOU. I have avoided at least half a dozen near-collisions, by SEEING EVERY CAR AROUND ME, MAKING EYE CONTACT, AND SLOWING DOWN AND STOPPING, if need be. Obviously, motorists are to blame for a number of these accidents, and awareness of bicycles needs to go up. But, concurrently, bicyclists MUST REALIZE THAT CARS CAN KILL THEM. This is as simple as being in a SMALL SEDAN and recognizing that a semi-truck can't see you in most situations. You don't cut off a semi-truck, you don't cut off a car.
Also, has anyone ever taught pedestrians in seattle TO LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE CROSSING THE STREET? Or is that just, like, some quaint Midwestern custom?

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 17, 2011 at 10:33 AM · Report

132

also, SEATTLE MOTORISTS ARE SOME OF THE MOST SPACEY, OUT TO LUNCH, CLUELESS bunch of motorists in the country. I've driven in Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Chicago, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota, Texas, Montana, California, Wyoming, New York state, and Washington. The only people who come close to being as clueless and spacey as seattle are drivers in Montana, and THERE ARE ABOUT AS MANY PEOPLE IN ALL OF MONTANA AS THE GREATER SEATTLE AREA. I mean, seriously: SEATTLE DRIVERS ARE STUPID, POORLY TRAINED, AND COMPLETELY OUT TO LUNCH.
Unfortunately, the pedestrians and bicyclists aren't a whole lot better

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 17, 2011 at 10:40 AM · Report

133

R127, keep it in mind next time you're riding on Dexter or University Avenue. They dead.

Posted by Mister G on September 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM · Report

134

MattC, there are more of us than there are of you. And now that you've decided bicyclists will be throwing roofing nails, I'll feel a little less inclined to hit the brakes next time one of you fools zips through a stop sign in front of my car.

Posted by Mister G on September 17, 2011 at 10:45 AM · Report

135

@pdonhaus:
You're an idiot. WHEN ARE RANDOM ACTS OF VIOLENCE EVER THE ANSWER? Only in video games, my friend. YOU are a major part of the problem. Without open discourse, discussion, commitment, and responsibility, nothing will be gained between these two (not even really separate) groups. Cars need to be more aware; bicyclists need to be more aware; roads need to be better marked. But really the bottom line is this: CARS AND BICYCLISTS NEED TO BE MORE AWARE. Being pissed off at other people, in case you didn't know, actually makes you less aware of what's going on around you.
You're the typical head-in-the-sand, thumb-up-his-ass, entitled to the Nth degree Seattleite that doesn't know a damn thing about anything outside of Seattle. SEATTLE IS ONE OF THE MOST BIKE FRIENDLY CITIES IN THE COUNTRY, and we're STILL BITCHING?? Seriously, folks, travel around the country and see what it's like to ride a bike somewhere else. You would probably be dead within a few hours.

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 17, 2011 at 10:47 AM · Report

136

@MattC:
You're little "right hook" comment. I've been a cyclist for as long as I can remember (since I was crashing my bike in my driveway at age five). This is the type of situation where the bicyclist needs to follow my three steps above: BE AWARE OF CARS CROSSING YOUR PATH, MAKE EYE CONTACT, SLOW DOWN AND STOP IF NECESSARY. Sure, in an ideal world, the car would see you and adjust accordingly. But guess what? Not only IS A BICYCLIST FAR HARDER TO SEE THAN A CAR, but it's also FAR HARDER FOR A CAR TO ADJUST TO A BICYCLIST, than it is for a bicyclist to adjust for a car. All this situation needs is the following: The bicyclist recognizes the cars intentions, slows to allow the car to pass him, then, if necessary, stops to allow the car to pass safely in front of him. Why is this easier than the car slowing down? A car slowing down in an intersection in which a traffic signal has not required this slowing of pace creates a potential accident-situation involving other cars in the area; there is the chance of being rear-ended, for example, by another car expecting the first car to clear the intersection. If the bike slows down and stops? It's removing itself from the situation, and is not causing the potential for a dangerous situation.
It's not JUST THE BICYCLISTS, it's not JUST THE CARS, IT'S THE CARS AND THE BICYCLISTS.
Without open discourse and recognition of each side's shortcomings, this is not going to go anywhere.

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 17, 2011 at 11:05 AM · Report

137

It's pretty comical if not unimpressive that the "Stranger Staff" gets the byline on this cute slice of melodramatic quasi-journalistic turd. I understand. When you define cars as "four-wheeled instruments of death" and the modern car driver as "a privileged individual who is the beneficiary of a long course of subsidies, tax incentives, and wars for cheap oil" - what self-respecting writer would dare put his/her name on that?

When I start seeing more cyclists obeying traffic laws and cops treating them like motorists, riding in a far less cavalier and reckless fashion, paying some kind of registration, only then will I start taking your whiny rants seriously. Until then, keep yapping about this revolution and the car as a thing of the past, but don't forget that in 2011, a staggering 3% of Seattle commutes via bicycle. Three per cent. You drama queens really have me pissing in my pants.

Posted by raputathebeauta on September 17, 2011 at 12:17 PM · Report

138

Look, if you don't like the way things are, go to Olympia and change them. You don't have the gumption? Then get a fucking car.

Posted by Sickofwhiners on September 17, 2011 at 12:25 PM · Report

139

@smitsmckey18, cut it out with the CAPS. It's obnoxious, and guarantees that no one will read what you write.

Posted by Mister G on September 17, 2011 at 1:27 PM · Report

140

So, what about people who live outside the city that have to commute to work each day in order to keep what's left of the economy going? I am a good and responsible driver, but it still seems people waste their time hating people who would like to get to work in one hour as opposed to 3 or 4? Gosh, I wish I had the opportunity for my life to function on a less efficient level. Perhaps no one should support the economy anymore, that way no one will be able to afford cars, gas or road repair, etc. Then we can all eventually begin to live like an Amish society of bicyclists. I am curious to know if you would all be waging war on cars if they were made out of and run off of hemp, like Henry Ford originally intended back in 1906? I am sorry a few stupid people have given you such a demeanor, but not everyone in a car is against you or deserves punishment.

Posted by Can I Get a Witness? on September 17, 2011 at 3:02 PM · Report

141

@Can I Get a Witness?
If I read your gibberish correctly, you can't handle a car sufficiently enough to pass a cyclist and are thus doomed to drive at 12-15 MPH. That slows you down, and the cars your car blocks. This is ruining the economy. Right? I recommend you get a bus pass, or a bike, and make the world a better place for everyone.

As a cyclist, I routinely have days where I pass about 50 more cars than pass me. Other days more cars pass me than I pass them. Overall we're a tie score I suppose, none slows the other down. I for one get to work faster by bike than be subway or car, so I ride.

In the end we all get to work on time, and because I'm on a bike, the motorists have one less car to wait behind at a light, and can park one space closer to town.

So when you learn to translate Jibberish to English, please do reply.

Posted by Matt C on September 17, 2011 at 5:56 PM · Report

142

I'm betting that a majority of this year's dead bikers were following the law when they got hit, and that the majority of the drivers that hit them were breaking the law or being negligent.

I wonder what the ratio is of deaths caused by careless bikers to deaths caused by careless drivers.

Posted by onion on September 17, 2011 at 7:12 PM · Report

143

yeah and 119's story about cutting off cyclists when turning right in front of them really stinks.

Posted by onion on September 17, 2011 at 7:13 PM · Report

144

#136/ smitsmckey18:
Right Hook, 101:
From out of nowhere, a slowing car overtakes a bike, bangs a quick right, leaving the cyclist attempting a panic stop but often injured or killed.

Per your story, Clearly you're 6 years old and have a short memory.

Let me tell you about roads in the real world. Right hooks happen like this: I'm going down hill and with a tail wind, so my speed is nearly 20 MPH. I'm traveling straight on an arterial road. I'm riding as the law requires: "as far to the right as practicable". Blinky lights, day-glo shirt, I'm doing all I can to help Mr. Mcgoo behind the wheel of his killing machine see/avoid me.

The impatient motorist doing 35MPH wants to take the next right... that motorist, already braking, passes me at 25 MPH slowing to 15, gets just a littttttttle past me, then cuts his wheel hard right. What I see for about 1.5 seconds is nothing - then car to my left - then car in front of me. No time to react, just a wall of steel appearing from out of nowhere.

Four fat tires and 1.5 tons of downward acceleration has much more gripping power than my skinny tires and rim brakes at maximum squeeze. I hit that rusty Chrysler Cordoba at about 15 MPH, go over the roof and land on the road, where the next car - "thump, thump!" finishes the job.

I'm dead because some asshole can't wait less than 5 seconds to make the turn.

My "little" right hook comment is reality. If bikers stopped for every passing car we'd... well, we'd be stopped, all the time. Some motorists comit to the right hook before the cyclist can see or hear the car - so in effect, we're blind and deaf. Place responsibility for avoiding Right Hooks on the average cyclist? No sale. No soup for you! FAIL smitsmckey18

The overtaking car sees the cyclist. The cyclist - no headphones, only the sound of wind in the ears - knows nothing of the swiftly approaching killer.

Nay I say. The driver is 100% at fault. The driver has committed [attempted/] homicide. Do you realize, that if a car is going 30 MPH and a bike 15, it only takes 5 seconds to get 100 feet ahead of the biker? Concurrently, if the driver is not going at least 15 MPH faster than the bike for at least 100 feet, there's less than 5 seconds to make the turn.

More...

Posted by Matt C on September 17, 2011 at 8:20 PM · Report

145

#134/MassahG:
So, I threaten to litter the roads (with nails, or cigarette buts, or breakfast cereals, or fruit bats...) . You respond by expressing intent to commit homicide? Woah, talk about some m'n'f'n snakes-on-a-plane!

Please note I also drive a pickup truck. And since I'm in "bike mode" even when driving, I often toss me some roofin' nails out the driver side window... you know, into the Southbound lane when I knows I'm a drivin' Norh. The quession you gots'ta ask yourself is... You gonna ram every' F-150 you see with the drivers side winnow down? 'Cuz I gets a lots more roofin' nails-per-mile when in my truck than on my bike, see?

I also toss some nails under every bridge I cross. You know, for the Trolls and such.

Posted by Matt C on September 17, 2011 at 8:39 PM · Report

146

What next, Terminator 4: Turf Wars? Grow up, people!!

This shit's something right out of Duel!

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 17, 2011 at 10:25 PM · Report

147

The driver is 100% at fault.

And the cyclista is 100% dead, because he failed to drive defensively.

Posted by Mister G on September 18, 2011 at 11:39 AM · Report

148

Sorry, @91, but that bullshit doesn't cut it...when most traffic is moving just fine at 25 mph, then you come along and slow everyone down to 10 mph, YOU are causing ALL THOSE VEHICLES YOU'RE HOLDING UP to burn more fuel. On a rainy day in Seattle, a car gets me where I need to go a lot faster, and a lot drier. Plus, if I have to pick up a lot of things, I have the room to carry all of it.

Posted by cattycat on September 18, 2011 at 3:29 PM · Report

149

MattC is another one of those self-righteous cyclists who think everyone should get out of THEIR way, and NO rules should EVER apply to them. Wasn't he one of the jerks involved in that holiday-time altercation with a motorist because a bunch of CriticalMassholes decided to block the ENTIRE roadway, and one of them got hit? His version of the story was quite different than the one the terrified motorist told the cops after he refused to stop because the cyclists were threatening him and trying to get him out of his vehicle. People like MattC need to be put somewhere that will make society safer without them.

Posted by cattycat on September 18, 2011 at 3:35 PM · Report

150

'I'd like to report a truck driver that's been endangering my life....'

I wonder if the late, great Cary Loftin is rolling in his grave or laughing his ass off.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 18, 2011 at 4:12 PM · Report

151

i was a bike courier for 3 years in seattle...the first thing the person training me said was "always assume no one knows how to drive" i took this to heart...i was never hit....the second thing he told me was "never ride in the bike lane" i rode right in the middle of the lanes downtown going at least the speed limit...and was hyper aware...if you decide to ride a bike be aware ...12 deaths in 9 years...how many car on car deaths have happened in that time period? i'm not trying to be insensitive to the loss of life but you take a risk every time you drive or ride your bike.....as for the "i hate drivers" "i hate cyclists" claptrap...please go see a therapist....you have serious problems

Posted by russ1 on September 18, 2011 at 4:59 PM · Report

152

I drive around Seattle a decent amount, don't bike, and I have to say I'm failing to see the outrage. Treat a biker with respect and they give it back to you (usually).

I pay attention to the bikers and never pull the "right hook" (or was that the biker pulling the right hook? no matter). But sometimes I simply don't see the biker. A great example is turning right from N 34th onto Stone Way N.

The BG trail runs right behind the (always awesome) Gypsy Cafe and often, runners or bikers don't slow down or look for cars turning right on red. Yes, you have the right of way when the light is green. But we don't want to hit you either and we can't fucking see you.

So please, slow down at blind intersections and look out for douches cutting you off by turning in front of you. This "war" bs is nonsense. You don't want to die and we don't want to hurt you.

Posted by bananajohn on September 18, 2011 at 6:40 PM · Report

153

Glad to see the discourse has remained civil.

Posted by TVDinner

on September 18, 2011 at 7:17 PM · Report

154

I hope you all kill yourselves.

Posted by Seeds on September 18, 2011 at 7:47 PM · Report

155

@151 & @152: Well said!

@154: Why?

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 18, 2011 at 8:36 PM · Report

156

Wasn't he one of the jerks involved in that holiday-time altercation with a motorist because a bunch of CriticalMassholes decided to block the ENTIRE roadway, and one of them got hit? His version of the story was quite different than the one the terrified motorist told the cops after he refused to stop because the cyclists were threatening him and trying to get him out of his vehicle.

One of these days, a cyclista will pull that kind of stunt with the wrong driver.

Posted by Mister G on September 18, 2011 at 9:59 PM · Report

157

Okay, You've all made your points.
What's the average cab fare in downtown Seattle nowadays?

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 19, 2011 at 1:18 AM · Report

158

@149/TrollyTroll:
"People like MattC need to be put somewhere that will make society safer without them."

Yes! Angry, intolerant, impatient people should not be allowed to pilot a 4000 lb vehicle down public roads at 60MPH!

Motorists kill 100 people a day on American roads. That's as many people the foreign terrorists killed on 9/11, once a month for the last 30 years.

Roads are much safer with you, me and Mister G on a bike, bus, or walking.

Embrace your epiphany and see you on that bus!

Posted by Matt C on September 19, 2011 at 5:19 AM · Report

159

@158 Sorry, but bull .... while motorists are indeed a common link between many traffic fatalities, it's only a common link. Most causes are actually distractions or inebriation. If you want to make a case against alcohol sales, legal narcotics, cell phones, etc. you could with the traffic fatalities. As to who is safer, there is no clear picture.

But I digress, again, it's EVERYONE (bike, car, walk) who just needs to start obeying the laws better, no one is blameless. So back to your bickering, it's an awesome comedy of errors.

Posted by KittenKoder

on September 19, 2011 at 5:36 AM · Report

160

@RIGHT HOOK GUY
I've been riding my bicycle for 15 years. Most of the time was spent in Lafayette, Indiana, where no one rides their bikes. No one rides their bikes. I mean, NO ONE. I was ran off the road when I was 12 years old by a panel van. I was made fun of by passing cars and have objects thrown at me. Guess how many times I've almost been hit by a car doing a "right hook maneuver"? Um, never. Do you want to know why? Because I pay really, really close attention to all of the cars around me, if I'm traveling more than 15 mph, I make sure that I'm constantly looking over my shoulder, and I get the fuck out of the way if I have to.
I've been in very, very few dangerous situations on my bicycle involving other cars, and almost all of them took place in Indiana. Would you like to know why? Because I recognize that cars are way fucking bigger than me, way easier to see than me, and what harder to stop than I am (apparently you need new brakes if you actually think a car can stop better than you. Unless you're riding one of those stupid, pointless, completely unsafe bikes that don't have brakes.)
I mean, dude, I have bicyclists in Seattle do some ridiculously stupid things. I have seen motorists in Seattle do some ridiculously stupid things. When two groups of ridiculously stupid people come together, bad shit tends to happen.
I can't wait until I'm not living in this stupid fucking town anymore where everyone here seems to think that Seattle is the be-all and end-all of American Cities. Seattle kind of sucks for a lot of reasons: We have really stupid, convoluted politics, we have really stupid, ridiculously bad drivers, known of whom pay attention or seem to have ANY idea where they're going, we have a bunch of entitled youngsters who are for some reason "pissed off" that they live in one of the most affluent, well-put together, well-run societies in the history of the world, and we have a bunch of vicious, low-intellect bike riders who think that riding a bike is, like, a fucking lifestyle or something. It's a means of transportation, and, guess what, when cars are involved, a dangerous one. Because, guess what buddy, driving around in 1000 pound vehicles at 30 mph is dangerous. So until the fossil fuels run out and we plunge into the next dark age, GET USED TO IT

More...

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 19, 2011 at 1:27 PM · Report

161

should read:
"Cars are way fucking bigger than me, way easier to see than me, and way harder to stop than I am"

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 19, 2011 at 1:29 PM · Report

162

I have never seen a group of people so oblivious to what's going on around them than pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists in this fair city. I have seen cars nearly t-bone each other at 30 mph, and the people just wave and go their merry ways. I mean, the level of stupidity and obliviousness in this city is appalling. I was taught, as a child, to look both directions when crossing a street, and to never step in front of a moving car. I've seen mothers pushing baby strollers step in front of moving busses in this city. Unless this is some sort of fucked up form of natural selection, people in Seattle need to get off their phones, turn off their ipods, and look around them a little bit when they are navigating the public transportation areas.
The simple answer to all of this is more awareness by everyone. Bicyclists need to be more aware when they are putting themselves in dangerous situations; there should probably be classes for it (for instance, before riding a motorcycle, the operator has to take an extensive safety course because it is universally recognized that motorcycles are hard to see. as a motorcyclist, you MUST assume that no cars see you. So why do bicyclists feel like they don't have to follow such simple safety protocols?). Drivers need to be more aware of bicyclists, and (this is crazy, I know) pedestrians need to look both ways before crossing the street.
My mantra when driving, walking or cycling is this: do everything that you can to make it so that no one else is effected by your actions. Never cut people off, never make people slow down, never step in front of moving cars. But, then, if everyone was as aware as me and as committed to not effecting people around them, the world would be a lot less fucked up of a place.

Posted by smitsmckey18 on September 19, 2011 at 1:38 PM · Report

163

@160: shitsmonkey18:
Angry much? Go find someone who will give you a hug.

You can be paying really, really good attention walking and if I'm behind you I can still sneak up behind you and slap you in the melon. In fact I should, for all the BS you're trying to spread about how falling victim to a motorist committing right hook is the cyclist's fault. "Of course she was raped, did you see what she was wearing?"

Hooray for you and your rubber neck, all looking behind you and such. I for one keep my eyes front, to avoid cars, potholes, pedestrians and to be sure to stop at red lights. Right Hooks are pretty darn dangerous, and your recommended coping strategy can get cyclists killed (for those who want to see good web videos of safe biking I highly recommend you google "cycling savvy" and "Commute Orlando").

You can get all chest thumpin' n' schlitz about your bicycling experience, but at the end of the day you are clearly just a frustrated motorist who had to brake once for a cyclist when making a right turn, and now have a bigaz chip on your shoulder. You're scared, I know. And small minded people react strongly to fear (see above, RE: hug). But claiming that cyclists have to yield to the Almighty Automobile Under Every Circumstance Even When The Motor Vehicle Operator is Wrong and Reckless is simply dumb.

Dumb Douche! But with effort and study, you can overcome the 'dumb'.

The overtaking vehicle is responsible for safe interaction with the overtaken. End of story. When a driver floors his gas pedal to get 10 feet in front of the bike, only to slam his brakes and cut his wheel, that's not just reckless driving, it's attempted murder.

Posted by Matt C on September 19, 2011 at 4:46 PM · Report

164

@159
KittenDiddler:
Wha? All people in car accidents are drunk or distracted? How about maybe half those people were drunk and distracted, and the other half were killed by people driving cars while drunk and distracted. Let's call that second group "collateral damage", just to be cute.

Before you call "bull" on something true that you don't believe because you-wish-it-wasn't-true: Do a little research. Today I used this thing called "google" that lead me to something called a "reference" to things called "facts": http://www.streetsblog.org/2011/09/19/st…
Wowzers. That was posted TODAY!

Now go use the google yourself. There's no telling what you might learn! You'll find out that the fact is that there is indeed a clear picture. Cars kill metric shit-tons of people, and cars are in turn driven by people. You want to change this fact, you have few choices:
1. Break the monopoly Cars have on transportation by:
A) Eliminating direct subsidies to cars from income and sales tax. Make motorists pay their fair share by funding highways strictly through fuel taxes.
B) Eliminate hidden subsidies. Fund all oil war efforts through fuel taxes. Fund subsidies to oil companies only through fuel taxes. The true cost of gasoline is more like $10 a gallon, look it up. As a sideline, look up how US income tax subsidized the export of refined gasoline to India and China when the recent recession was at its worst (Oh I just puked a little in my mouth).
2. Enforce strict liability for roadway deaths caused by motorists. I'm not talkin' an eye for an eye here, I'm only advocating lifetime loss of driving privileges for taking a life.
3. Fund non-motorized transportation sufficiently. Something Americans learned in the Nineteenth Century (then somehow forgot) is that monopolies are bad. Bad, bad. Let's break the monopoly automobiles have on American transportation, Kay?

More...

Posted by Matt C on September 19, 2011 at 5:16 PM · Report

165

@164 I think you lost everyone when you quoted a Seinfeld episode back @144.

Posted by JF on September 19, 2011 at 9:23 PM · Report

166

For all this right hook business, the car people need to see the bike lane as another lane of travel (erm... which it... is).

If you were on a 3 lane road, and you were in the middle lane, and you needed to turn right, you would cross the far right lane by looking to make sure you don't hit anyone. Then you get into the turn lane. Same shit with the bike lane.

It's not fucking hard to look over your shoulder and you do it all the time for cars already. Yes it alters your routine somewhat. Deal.

For the record, I never bike around Seattle. I just know how to look out for other people.

Posted by approriatelysizedspoon on September 19, 2011 at 10:30 PM · Report

167

Bikes scare me, feels like they are aiming at me when I drive, it is scary I just want to goto my Seattle appts and leave. Seattle drivers are so odd about road sharing, it makes something simple a huge stress.

Posted by Frank M on September 20, 2011 at 12:36 AM · Report

168

Bicyclists are extremely annoying when they're
"driving" with cars, anyone who's in a vehicle can admit that. However I will say cyclists seem to obey the laws at all times.
So I say put in more bike lanes. But if you think we're going to approve shutting down "entire streets" and lowering the speed limits to 20mph, you've got another thing coming. Look at the traffic in this city.

Posted by SaraJean on September 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM · Report

169

I am a pedestrian, a bike rider, and a car driver. I also ride on the city bus sometimes. I just about equally use these forms of transportation on a weekly basis whether it's for work, shopping, entertainment or whatever. I've been living in Seattle (Capitol Hill) for almost a year now and what I've witnessed is that it's NOT about the mode of transportation but about the PERSON using that mode of transportation.

On a weekly basis I witness pedestrians jay walking or not obeying walk signals even in congested traffic, barely missing being hit by a car or cyclist. I see cyclists not giving a flying f*** about anybody and riding their bikes through intersections at red lights, stop signs or pedestrian yield signs! I also witness plenty of people driving their cars like a bat out of hell and simply not slowing down and paying attention to their surroundings, especially in the urban congested parts of town.

Look, we are ALL apart of this problem and until we can ALL be better commuters by respecting each other and paying attention on the streets, sidewalks, park trails, or wherever you may be - than nothing will change.

Posted by DesignLP on September 20, 2011 at 12:35 PM · Report

170

When a bike can run over a car and crush it killing all its occupants then car drivers will pay attention. Better start making way bigger bikes or stay the hell out of the way.

Posted by Bikers and not the good kind on September 20, 2011 at 10:08 PM · Report

171

@157: Ahem.....so...cab fare in Seattle, like the real estate market, has become exorbitant?

@168 SaraJean: I no longer live in Seattle and haven't for over 14 years, now, but I have seen the traffic. That's why I'm asking.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 20, 2011 at 11:31 PM · Report

172

168: actually devoting whole streets to bicycles has been seen to increase traffic flow, see Sydney or Copenhagen for examples. NYC is seeing dramatic gains from removing car surfaces as well.

counter intuitive but when you reduce car surface it can increase throughput. same for reduced speeds and higher parking rates :)

Posted by JustSomeGuy on September 20, 2011 at 11:38 PM · Report

173

I take the lightrail to work everyday and I ride my bike to and from the gym at the end of every day from Beacon hill to Capitol hill. I drive my car when needed.

I have a lot more issue with bicycle riders than any. They don't abide by the rules of the road and then they are pricks to car drivers when they (the bike rider) break the law and almost get hit. They want more street trails and I can get on board with that. However, they don't want to pay for it. The car drivers do with licensing taxes. I have almost been hit by bicycles several times as a pedestrian and I think they should be licensed so they may be tracked for traffic violations and held accountable.

Then bike riders also feel the need to do the occasional protest and clog up city traffic. Do they honestly believe they are helping their situation? I am sure everysituation is unique and cars do need to be careful, but in my experiences on all ends of the issue, I am more disappointed with the cyclists.

Posted by jmspf on September 21, 2011 at 10:08 AM · Report

174

Posted by jmspf on September 21, 2011 at 10:12 AM · Report

175

Thank you all for your rather disheartening information.
I will neither drive nor ride a bike through Seattle and take a cab during my next visit to The Emerald City.

I hope it all works out. Peace.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 21, 2011 at 12:33 PM · Report

176

First, you bus riders are 80% subsidized. You are all freeloaders.

Second, when is the last time any of you saw a bicyclist stop for a stop sign?

Posted by billwald on September 21, 2011 at 1:33 PM · Report

177

You know, I just had a very evil thought, but one that would teach drivers to respect bicyclists. It would be very Draconian but I think sometimes that is the only way people learn.

It would be a proximity field setup around a bicycle and it's rider by a device. If the proximity field were violated, you could have a device that emits a short field EMP or microwave blast. That will disable a car that gets too close.

The capacitor banks and magnetron would probably take about 15 to 20lbs on a bike but it'd be oh so worth it.

Posted by kd1s on September 21, 2011 at 3:54 PM · Report

178

AMEN! And thank you!
As a senior pedestrian and sometimes cyclists I ask where the heck has the Health Department been on all this, for decades in denial about the health aspects and the social costs: from drivein everythings, fast junk food, continous snacking from bags and boxes and slurping sugary drinks to coroners, emergency response, police surveillance courts, rehab, and 2 car garages that could house many people
What STUPID design to make us share passageways with automobiles. Really!
And all that exhaust goes straight into our little ones faces and lungs.
This is much worse than smoking.
And the NOISE, OMG!

Posted by myna lee johnstone on September 21, 2011 at 9:44 PM · Report

179

Cars need to get some skin in the game before they can interact with bikes and peds as equals. The unspoken factor is that a car can ultimately kill a human powered commuter with impunity, lined in a steel cocoon with seat belts and huge sense of entitlement, a motorist feels none of this inequity. Changing the game by placing power in hands of cyclists via Critical Mass and Random Acts of Violence seems to be hugely threatening to readers of this thread (cyclists and motorists alike) which indicates it probably has real power to effect change of attitudes.

Posted by pdonahue on September 21, 2011 at 11:49 PM · Report

180

Changing the game by placing power in hands of cyclists via Critical Mass and Random Acts of Violence seems to be hugely threatening to readers of this thread (cyclists and motorists alike) which indicates it probably has real power to effect change of attitudes.

You really want to start a war with cars? Really? You'll lose that war, cyclista.

Posted by Mister G on September 22, 2011 at 3:10 PM · Report

181

Kind of a weak article and perpetuating something that doesn't really exist.

We need to consider a few things:

1. Weather: it rains and is dark here 6 months out of the year. Go to any hot bike commuting route on July 15 and count the cyclists. There are mass. Go back to it September 15th and the numbers are dwindling. Now go back to it on November 15th and there is maybe one cyclist every fifteen minutes. To improve the city congestion the money needs to be thrown at the light rail to get cars off the roads. Making more bike lanes is a band-aid fix. The people who want to ride are going to ride and the people saying "I really want to ride but it's so dangerous" shouldn't do it, ever. You're either in or out. There's no room for any in-between wishy-washy Seattleness on this topic.

2. Physical Geography and Greed: Seattle isn't laid out properly for cycling. On top of that, the rampant development of the 1990's caught us all off guard while we drank in the bars and hid in our homes. Developers raped and pillaged property that needed to be destroyed to make more room for DEDICATED bike lanes (not those stupid share ways). The 1990's real-estate boom was the time to take action. It's now too late to take that land back from the folks who are profiting from it. For good cycling master plans I would turn to Denver and check them out (forget Amsterdam and all the places always mentioned, they have a completely different social and economic structure than the U.S. And Portland? Give me a break-it sucks for cycling except for the kick-ass dedicated mountain biking near town).

3. Don't wage a war on cars because that's what our capitalist economy is designed around and it can't be changed. You are then fucking with commerce as we know it and you may not be able to get your iphone repaired one day if the truck wasn't able to deliver parts on time. Don't have an iphone? Well then imagine it becoming harder to get bananas or diapers or whatever it is you need. You can't win a war against oil no matter how hard you try, it's what bike tires are made of!

I ride 4 to 5 times a week, 16 to 40 miles per day depending on my mood and the weather. All year long. I don't bitch about it and accept it for what it is. I have been hit by a car and hope that never happens again because it sucks. But the bottom line is that Seattle's climate, physical geography and economic greed (minority but strong) will never make it a decent cycling city, ever. There's a small, core group of people who are willing to ride here all year long but they are less risk-adverse than the majority of the population (face it: Seattle is no longer an "outdoor hotbed" as it once was, it's more known now for drawing introverted computer programers to the region to support the abundance of computer related companies. At least the Pruis' seems to be selling well.). The numbers speak for themselves: count the cyclists throughout the year and do the math on how important this issue really is.

More...

Posted by Steve123 on September 22, 2011 at 3:47 PM · Report

182

As a pedestrian, I've nearly been hit by a bicyclist several times. It should be illegal to ride on the sidewalk.

Posted by heather531 on September 22, 2011 at 9:17 PM · Report

183

I really don't know Seattle anymore.
Sigh.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 22, 2011 at 9:38 PM · Report

184

I couldn't read this. I am an anti-car militant. When your car encroaches on my personal space in the cross walk, I raise my hand at you, or shout obscenities at you. If you are close enough for me to touch your precious car, you are too fucking close. If you continue to encroach after being warned, I put a dent in your precious car. If you get out of the car I will fight you.

Posted by Bobito on September 23, 2011 at 8:19 AM · Report

185

I really appreciate this article and of course any bike or pedestrian accident that results in injury or death is horrible.

As someone who drives and bikes, I would like to ask that bikers also take responsibility for biking carefully - in the same way I drive carefully and respect other people on the road.

I live on Capitol Hill and when I see people with no helmets, no lights at night, and no brakes on their bikes it is incredibly frustrating.

It is okay to give up some of your "coolness" to be safe on the roads. Let's all do our part.

Posted by carab on September 23, 2011 at 11:21 AM · Report

186

Not to sound insensitive, but roads were built for cars. We have paid for them dearly with our tax dollars. On my way to work yesterday morning, a cyclist blew through a stop sign at top speed, which is not the first time I have seen this. No hand signals when turning or going straight...blowing through stop signs and traffic signals. Where is the uproar when another driver gets hurt? There isn't....because roads and signals were put there for DRIVERS. You want to keep your right to "ride the road", you should be kept to the same laws of the road that the people they were built for have to abide by, or face the consequences, like we do. Pay better attention and obey traffic laws when riding your bike, or shut the fuck up!

Posted by youresodumb on September 23, 2011 at 11:33 AM · Report

187

Posted by carab on September 23, 2011 at 12:39 PM · Report

188

Hey Bobito #184, Scary shit! You will put up your hand, then you will dent my car, then you will fight me. Fucking terrifying!!
Then you will find out how much cool stuff I carry in my Hummer, and get to meet a couple of my cop buddies. Then you will get to cool your jets in a cold cell.
See you at the cross-walks asshole.
Vroom-vroom

Posted by SpicyBaconator on September 24, 2011 at 10:00 PM · Report

189

@179-" Random Acts of Violence". Ohhh I like that. Any issue I disagree with or have no solution for should be met with a random act of violence. I like guns too so this should be fun!

Posted by Bruce Banner on September 25, 2011 at 4:43 AM · Report

190

@186/youresodumb
Not to sound insensitive, but roads were built for cars. "

That's the fundamental problem. Write your congressional representatives and demand Complete Streets". The 1% of federal transportation funds spent on sidewalks and bicycle facilities frankly makes driving easier on motorists.

"We have paid for them [roads] dearly with our tax dollars."

If you mean fuel taxes, no. Fuel taxes do not even cover the cost of federal highways, not by a long shot. Those roads are for motorists only. Meaning: that portion of sales, excise, income and property tax that goes for roads also goes for highways, where bikes, pedestrians and horseback riders cannot go. For the slow, this means that non-motorists actually subsidize motorists As a car-free taxpayer (and at my income, a very highly taxed taxpayer), I cordially invite you to check your facts and until then STFU.

As for cyclists rolling through stop signs: I do it all the time. Always slightly to the right of a car doing the same thing. While the car slows to 10-15 MPH, I pretty much don't even slow down, because 10 is my top speed. If that "California-roll car" were to hit someone, that's 4000lbs times 10 MPH. Me, it's 200lbs times 10 MPH. Do some math, dummy, the car is the killer.

Posted by Matt C on September 25, 2011 at 5:29 PM · Report

191

....as a rusted out 1960 Peterbilt from Hell goes flying over the side of the doomed Alaskan Way Viaduct....

R.I.P., Cary Loftin.

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 25, 2011 at 5:52 PM · Report

192

I don't think the war on cars is a cars VS bikes thing. I think its just a broke ass city trying to find ways to tax people. And if the people are going to imagine some green energy jihad, they're going to miss the point. This is about expanding the city's responsibility towards buses and bikes during an economic time at which the city can't afford expanding.

The local economy has survived the financial crisis and I think we've forgotten how fragile the whole thing is. There are two kinds of people in Seattle: people who work for STBX/MSFT/AMZN and the people who serve them. Vast generalization I know, but there is not a lot of diversity in the money. So people are a bit uptight about their money because there is low security in it. STBX probably isn't going anywhere anytime soon but what if MSFT or AMZN were to take hits in the market place? That would effect everyone in Seattle. Not just restaurants but also non-profits and everyone who depends on the service industry.

Maybe I'm crazy. I don't know. I'm talking out of my ass but I think we need to step back from the cars VS bikes thing and be smart about this.

Posted by platypusrex256

on September 27, 2011 at 11:38 AM · Report

193

The wearing of a helmet is completely irrelevant in an automobile-bicycle collision. Having it on your head should not make it "more okay" for you to be present on the road.

How nonsensical would the conversation be if, in response to running over a bicyclist, a motorist rebukes, "She wasn't wearing a helmet!"

Posted by ha1ku on September 28, 2011 at 5:05 PM · Report

194

Next time, take the train!
A big bonus: it's got a bar on board!

Posted by auntie grizelda on September 29, 2011 at 6:32 PM · Report