Archive forLaw and Order

WTFPalo Alto and Mt. View Drivers?

Okay. Yeah.
So I wasn’t going to complain about this after the first two times. But in a third incident, I feel compelled to tell my tale.

First, a PSA, Automobile operators: Do not pass a vehicle when it is occupying a lane, unless you use a passing lane. This means at stoplights too! Yes, there is a queue at stoplights, believe it or not.

What do I mean. Well. So twice recently, I have been hit. Nothing to worry about. I was stopped at a stoplight, in the middle of a lane, which is not only entirely legal, but safer and less confusing to those who realize a bike is a vehicle. But twice, automobile operators have decided to attempt to maneuver their automobile around me when there isn’t enough space to do so. They end up not knowing the exact size of their car, and their mirror strikes me. And I’m like WTF. Sometimes I give them a look and a shrug that screams WTF.

A third time just yesterday, I was biking down Castro St. In Mt View. Sure, it doesn’t have a bike lane. But it is not a controlled-access highway, anything but. I am allowed to bike on it. Anyways, I was stopped at the California St. stoplight behind an automobile. It was working fine, like things usually do. Then an automobile came up behind me and was moving to the left and coming real close. I saw the light turn green and intending to avoid a collision between the car behind me and myself, I began moving forward. Unfortunately, the car ahead of me did not start when the light turned green, and smack! I rear-ended it. Yes, me, a cyclist rear-ended a car. Tee hee. I didn’t really get a chance to ask them if they were ok. I imagine they were, since they drove off without hassling me. Maybe they didn’t even feel the bump. Anyways, I felt awful, because I shouldn’t be hitting cars. But also I was pissed. Cars shouldn’t be hitting me, and I shouldn’t have to *worry* about that if I’m biking by the law.
So don’t hit me!
Next automobile operator that hits me, however lightly, gets a chance to give me their insurance info to pay for my doctor’s visit to make sure I’m still healthy and pay for a bike tuneup to make sure my vehicle is still road-safe. I’m not being a bitch, I just dont’ wanna get hit.

Oh also. In general Palo Alto and Mt. View drivers are pretty damn good about treating cyclists properly. Some of you take hell of care (you follow slowly behind me even when its a wide right lane or I’m in a bike lane, or let me go at an all-way stop even though you got there first, etc.). Most of you simply treat cyclists like the vehicle operators we are.


Who said “buttslol!!!!”?

This is a response to a post on The Annalog.

What I meant by “buttsloL!!!!” (Which was not an anonymous comment, so i’m safe!) was, that this is an important issue, and there are multiple sides to consider. First off, yes it is the public sphere, and by blogging in the first place and also by allowing comments, a blogger is inviting criticism of their words.

However, consider someone you don’t know who anonymously posts a few harassing comments on a blog. First off, find them (since so few people are behind static IPs now, this’ll be tough to find for sure… are you going to try to ask SBC who was using some IP at such and such time? and if they’re on AOL, good luck.) That activation barrier crossed, you gotta take it to court!

Point being, this law is only going to be applied to cases where it needs to be—like the anonymous poster who posts until you cry—just like it is meant for the callers. (See: Scream).

As long as this law is enforced fairly, people will still be able to post anonymously, and even flame anonymously, within reason. So, we can continue leaving anonymous buttsloL!!!!s, within reason. Also, if its not anonymous, (and not intentionally libelious), flaming is still accepted with open arms.

That said, I see your point, Anna. A slippery slope may be tough to argue, but it certainly can develop. That is why I don’t forsee myself prosecuting Heywood or Pat anytime soon.