Why are you comparing two completely different things? Are you being deliberately dense to start an argument? You are comparing a known sanctioned cycling event to illegal riders, and illegal riders to licensed and insured drivers who legally have a right to the road.
They’re like those biker tools that block intersections so the entire gang gets through or street takeovers.
This sentence describes bike party to a t, which is not really officially sanctioned – they just give the police a heads up to be nice.
I am not trying to be dense, i am just trying to explain why bicyclists block intersections to let the whole group go through. It is partially to protest cars.
The ones I see aren’t cyclists participating in group events. It’s dirt bikes, atv’s, and now even some e-bikes, unlicensed, unsanctioned, stunt riding and being general assholes on the road. Stop trying to twist reality into somehow legitimizing their BS.
I dont see why the roads should only be for “licensed” cars. Stunt riding is fine as long as it doesn’t hurt people. Sometimes they join in the bike party. It seems like you’re trying to say the roads should exclude all these vehicles, when I would like more ebikes on the road and less cars. Dirt bikes and atvs can come too.
I am not a big fan of motorized vehicles, I generally bike. But it seems to me that saying “stunt riding is fine as long as it doesn’t hurt people” is more or less the same as saying “drunk driving is fine as long as it doesn’t hurt people”. That is if we are talking about stunt driving on a public road (haven’t read the whole discussion). stunt driving is much riskier than calm driving and when you do it in a public road you transfer that risk to other people, including pedestrians and non motorised bikers, who don’t want to be involved.
Why are you comparing two completely different things? Are you being deliberately dense to start an argument? You are comparing a known sanctioned cycling event to illegal riders, and illegal riders to licensed and insured drivers who legally have a right to the road.
It’s Blahaj, they’re not known for their intelligence.
This sentence describes bike party to a t, which is not really officially sanctioned – they just give the police a heads up to be nice.
I am not trying to be dense, i am just trying to explain why bicyclists block intersections to let the whole group go through. It is partially to protest cars.
The ones I see aren’t cyclists participating in group events. It’s dirt bikes, atv’s, and now even some e-bikes, unlicensed, unsanctioned, stunt riding and being general assholes on the road. Stop trying to twist reality into somehow legitimizing their BS.
I dont see why the roads should only be for “licensed” cars. Stunt riding is fine as long as it doesn’t hurt people. Sometimes they join in the bike party. It seems like you’re trying to say the roads should exclude all these vehicles, when I would like more ebikes on the road and less cars. Dirt bikes and atvs can come too.
I am not a big fan of motorized vehicles, I generally bike. But it seems to me that saying “stunt riding is fine as long as it doesn’t hurt people” is more or less the same as saying “drunk driving is fine as long as it doesn’t hurt people”. That is if we are talking about stunt driving on a public road (haven’t read the whole discussion). stunt driving is much riskier than calm driving and when you do it in a public road you transfer that risk to other people, including pedestrians and non motorised bikers, who don’t want to be involved.