I commute via bike. I do it because I enjoy it, because I’ve lost 2-4 pants sizes in the past five months, and because it’s a just-plan-good time.
Although I just started biking seriously again in June of 2007, I had a ton of experience as an urban and distance biker. I’m pretty defensive (and I write that knowing that in doing so I’ve very likely written something that can be used as an ironic coda by some jagoff in the event of a mishap in the future), because when biking in the city, everything you do can kill you, and everything you don’t do can kill you, and everything someone else does or doesn’t do can kill you.
Which was what I worried about last spring, when I saw hordes of new bicyclists joining us out on the road. You could tell lots of them were newbies; I saw lots of telltale signs of the less-experienced biker; innocuous ones like coasting down long hills (better to keep pedalling, even if it’s just freewheeling, to keep your muscles from cooling off), and serious ones, like zoning out on busy streets. I joked with a few other bikers that we could expect a heavy toll of accidents among all those newbies out there.
Sadly but inevitably, that’s pretty much what happened.
Being a conservative and a biker, I get plenty of flak from both sides; some conservatives take the car culture as a matter of pride (as do I – or as would I, if I had a cooler car) and take a lot of really dumb rhetorical swats at bikers; many bikers are pretty chauvinistic about their left-centeredness.
There’s a big, important story in there; bikes are different than cars. Some cities – like Boise, Idaho – recognize that bikes are not just spindlier looking cars, and have changed their laws (bikes can regard stop signs as “Yields”, and stop lights as signs). The changes will do doubt piss off drivers – although they shouldn’t, since people who follow the laws will never run afoul of each other anyway. There are good, health and safety-related reasons for these changes. Which doesn’t change the fact that some bikers are just plain dumb and/or inexperienced (above and beyond the whole “Democrat” thing), and some conservatives say really dumb things about bikers.
No big surprise there, right?
Of course, given a choice between a real story and a dumb sideshow, the local alt-media knows what to cover.
Emily Kaiser caught Anti-Strib being un-PC:
The latest from the Anti-Strib blog is sure to get hardcore bikers and Sen. Barack Obama fans riled up. After recent reports of deaths and injuries due to the increasing numbers of commuters taking to their bikes for a primary mode of transportation, the Anti-Strib blog says it might help Sen. John McCain win the election.
Gosh. Hyperbole. Hardly new at Anti-Strib – or the City Pages, for that matter.
Not that it matters; I haven’t read a dead-tree edition of the CP in years, and doubt I’ve willingly patronized one of their advertisers in even longer.
But the comment section was where things got interesting mildly loathsome. “Scottsdale Woman”, proprietor of local deranged-nutbar hangout “Mercury Rising”, wrote:
Oh, and by the way: A heavy-duty cyclist of my acquaintance [I couldn’t help but laugh when I read that “heavy-duty cyclist” bit, picturing a 400 pound guy on a recumbent – Ed.] wants you to know two (2) [Two (2)? You mean deux (II)? Please be more specific – Ed.] things:
1) Your comments are being reported as terroristic threats to the Minneapolis and Saint Paul police departments, and:
Oh, goody.
This is, of course, the same whinging crone who responded to my call for vigilance of anti-RNC protestors by calling me a “provocateur”. But let Tracy Eberly take a joking swipe at her 400-pound friends, and suddenly she’s Ms. (?) Law and Order?
(And if there’s anyone at the metro police departments would could pass this “forwarding” on, that’d be much appreciated).
And I loved this bit:
2) A growing number of cyclists now carry handguns.
Wow.
I’d go to Mercury Rising to see how Scottsdale Woman stood on the Minnesota Personal Protection Act, but that’d involve…well, going to Mercury Rising. That’s just crazy talk.
But it’s ironic, isn’t it, that Wes Skoglund was partly right? That there are people out there who will turn traffic accidents into shootouts? Of course, like Scottsdale Woman, they are lefties and Obama groupies, not actual gunnies. Not that that’s a surprise.
And while as a long-time carry-permit-reform activist I would never dream of confirming or denying anyone actually carries anything, and stipulating that it’s very hard to find a good carry rig for biking (yet another reason to eschew that skin-tight lycra crap), I have to ask – how in-freaking-credibly stupid is this “woman?”
She’s taking it on herself to remind the car-driving public – even the a**holes who don’t like bikers – that some of us might be carrying?
Thanks for nothing!
“She” also does a drive-by outing of Tracy Eberly’s place of employment. Which brings us to a modest proposal.
This city is clogged with anonymous bloggers, invariably lefties, who make scabrous claims and gutless ad-hominem attacks from behind pseudonyms, taking big, brave (and usually fact-challenged) swats at peoples’ ethics, personalities and histories. Some of these attacks – like “Scottsdale Woman’s” in the City Pages – are direct attacks on peoples’ livelihoods.
I can’t help but think that some of these people would be a lot more polite if they – like most of us conservative bloggers, Hinderaker and Johnson, Morrissey, Brodkorb, Banaian, Eberly, Tucci and, er, yours truly – had their real names out there.
So maybe it’s time to abolish the anonymous leftyblog; to find, and “out”, the most egregiously gutless, the ones that attack from cover and skitter away behind their anonymity.
Not to say it’d be easy; it’s not that hard to cover your tracks in the world of blogs.
But if there’s one thing conservative bloggers are good at, it’s finding things we’re not supposed to find. And if there’s one thing anonymous leftybloggers are good at, it’s having stuff we’re not supposed to find.
No, I have no idea how. Just saying.
This city is clogged with anonymous bloggers, invariably lefties, who make scabrous claims and gutless ad-hominem attacks from behind pseudonyms…I can’t help but think that some of these people would be a lot more polite if they – like most of us conservative bloggers, Hinderaker and Johnson, Morrissey, Brodkorb, Banaian, Eberly, Tucci and, er, yours truly – had their real names out there.
The AntiStrib contributors all post under pseudonyms or first names only (who can blame them?) and their real names don’t appear anywhere on the site, except for “Ed Salden.” Isn’t he the resident lefty there?
As to cyclists — and other law-abiding folks — lawfully carrying handguns: great.
That said, the notion of a handgun being useful in a self-defense car-vs.-bike situation is, while not utterly impossible, just this side of it. What is the putative permit holder going to do about the clueless or arrogant driver who drives too close? Try to scare him/her away, hope the driver notices the waving of the gun, and swerves in the right direction to move away and not the wrong one to squash the person who they think is threatening them with a gun?
Silly.
As to how, err, PW would know that “a growing number of cyclists now carry handguns”, err, huh? Did I miss something in the BCA report where permit holders now have to register their usual mode of transportation? Or report it to lefty bloggers?
As I doubt will surprise, well, anybody, I’m certainly in favor of competent, law-abiding adults who do or don’t ride bikes regularly or ever getting carry permits, and carrying wherever it’s proper and lawful. But I think that anybody who figures that some baseless pronouncement about cyclists with handguns is going to do anything useful should think again.
Oh — as to a carry rig for biking: fanny pack, shoulder holster (if you’re going to be wearing a covering garment), or belly band, which can be fastened higher to work as a “chest band” for guys or particularly flat-chested women.
Alternately: pocket holster, preferably in a pocket that snaps or zips closed.
Joel,
The notion of drawing during a dumb road rage incident is, as you note, mind-bogglingly stupid. And I can see shooting simultaneously violating all four elements of an affirmative self-defense claim.
As to carrying: I figured it’d be one of those rigs, all of which have their drawbacks on a bike, especially a touring bike.
I’m thinking a saddle boot would be cool. Especially with an M1928 Thompson in it.
TiSP:
The AntiStrib contributors all post under pseudonyms or first names only (who can blame them?)
What, Anti-Strib is the standard?
Anyway – everybody knows who most of them are. They all appear in public; their names are available to the modestly curious.
And if they grossly offend you, by all means figure their identities out.
their real names don’t appear anywhere on the site, except for “Ed Salden.” Isn’t he the resident lefty there?
Yes. And by far the worst writer.
Tim:
“The AntiStrib contributors all post under pseudonyms or first names only (who can blame them?) and their real names don’t appear anywhere on the site, except for “Ed Salden.” Isn’t he the resident lefty there? ”
Yes and yes. Tracy’s long since been the brave one in front. Ed started out as a “target” of a post based on one (and later one or two more) Strib Letters to the Editor. He came around and thought he’d have some fun and a few conversations at the Anti-Strib. He’s been a positive boon in several respects.
However, he has a close association with the Anti-Strib’s resident Scicilian businessman. Folks call him the Godfather.
As little as I blog these days, I maintain the same handle that I started with because the Left-Leaning blogs have seemed more than a little fevered and enthusiastic in regards to the attention they give to any blogger to the right of Stalin, Mao, and (their favorite hero) Che.
In fact, the tendency of some utter jackasses to go hog wild (and I choose my terms carefully) on Tracy has made me a little reluctant to do much blogging… so I’ve squandered the meager traffic that I ever built up. (Which is still more than the pernicious legal-eagle Peev).
Tracy and the gang will be fine and weather the shrieks from the selectively sarcasm-blind crowd… who approach everything from the socialist side of the fence.
Which brings me to the question:
Why is it those folks are so vicious and so uber-snarky and so smarmy on their blogs, but so frighteningly earnest and rigidly humorless when a blog from the other side of the isle is free and easy with sarcasm?
I think a 44 Magnum, mounted right on the handlebars, would get you plenty of room and respect. Of course, it would weigh almost as much as the bike.
I know you’re just kidding about the boot on the bike, but let me treat it seriously, for just a sec — if you’re knocked down, off of a bicycle, or while walking, by somebody who means you additional harm, the last thing you want is for your safety equipment to be sliding away, out of your reach.
Timmy,
I use my real first name. It’s called “branding”. I am not difficult to find, as my e-mail address is available in every comment I make at Anti-Strib, and that has my last name in it. So I cheerfully invite you to take your “who can blame them?” and stick it where the Sun don’t shine.
Now go get your shine box.
I discussed bike carrying last night with my permit instructor (he goes to my church)–we thought a shoulder holster with a snap to secure the weapon would work great.
Now for use against cars….well, you’d have some difficulty demonstrating those four rules, of course, but if you were accosted by someone spoiling for a fight, it just might be handy.
BB’s is right… considering the bike rider certainly couldn’t get away in such a slow mode of transportation, he’d have no choice but to fire at an evil SUV driver.
Probably three or four times.
Back in the days when I tooled my Sportser around St. Paul (helmetless) the goal was to look so dangerous that the other cars kept their distance. Boots, leather jacket, gauntlets that went up to the elbow, and dark glasses.
It worked. I rode that motorcycle as my main form of transportation between April & November for over five years and never had an accident.
Tough to pull off the look on bicycle, though.
Now that would be an evil SUV hobbyist, Badda, and actually, I was referring to the possibility that someone might accost one on foot.
Terry disclosed: “Back in the days when I tooled my Sportser around St. Paul (helmetless) the goal was to look so dangerous that the other cars kept their distance. Boots, leather jacket, gauntlets that went up to the elbow, and dark glasses.”
http://i.rollingstone.com/assets/rs/2/1483/images/00106966.jpg
Too much facial hair, AC. And the studs are grotesque.
When you buy a 99-cent package of studs at the local craft store & put them on your jacket you must exercise discretion lest you appear too ‘precious’.
Pingback: Gutless | Shot in the Dark