http://www.transportationalternatives.org/press/askta/041116bikebill.html
Stop the anti cycling bill
Tue, 11/16/2004 - 9:15pm
Tue, 11/16/2004 - 9:16pm
#1
"To save you having to cut and paste, here's the clickable link:
http://www.transportationalternatives.org/press/askta/041116bikebill.html"
Wed, 11/17/2004 - 11:02am
#2
Stop the anti cycling bill
"So everyone will know more about this bill...this is from the Transportation Alternatives Web Site:
http://www.transalt.org/press/askta/041116bikebill.html
""A draconian anti-bicycling bill, Int. No. 497, was recently introduced to the New York City Council by Councilmember Madeline Provenzano.""
""If passed, Int. No. 497 would require every bicycling New Yorker over sixteen years old to obtain bicycle license tags from the NYC Department of Transportation. The bill stipulates that those who do not display such tags on their bicycles would be subject to up to 15 days imprisonment in addition to hefty fines and bicycle confiscation.""
Everyone should protest.
"
Wed, 11/17/2004 - 11:21am
#3
It's a media ploy
Boy, they must really have a lot of bike terrorists out there in City Island!
Good luck with registering all them cyclists, and enforcing the law. Maybe the annual Tour de Bronx can set up an extra table for licensing participants.
http://www.nyccouncil.info/constituent/member_details.cfm?con_id=15&VOTE...
Crackpot, yes. But qualitatively, not all that far from TA's continued reactionary stance toward Critical Mass. Foot-in-mouth spokesman Noah Budnick believes we should all make nice and stay in the bike lane.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-11-15-bikes-new-york_x.htm
Wed, 11/17/2004 - 11:55am
#4
Which councilperson is from City Island?
I ask because there are two sponsors of the bill. One is Provenzano. The other one is someone named Reed.
Incidentally, having been knocked down, knocked unconscious, and knocked front-toothless by a bike rider some years ago while I was crossing the street, with the light, I am not totally unsympathetic to the aims of the bill.
However, its scope is overly broad, bringing to mind the old saw about swatting a fly with a howitzer.
The biggest dangers and violators are commercial riders, most especially sidewalk-riding restaurant delivery people. (The daytime bike messengers seem to have cooled it some in recent years.)
It would make a lot more sense to require licensing all commercial riders, with the fines to be paid by those who employ them. That would get the problem fixed real fast.
Only thinking aloud. (But I'm putting on my helmet and bulletproof cycling vest for the incoming artillery that's certain to follow.)
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 6:33am
#5
License to ill
I totally agree with you Peter - what is the big freakin' deal about getting a license for your bike(s).
I have had a number of near misses with delivery guys speeding north (wrong way)up Columbus Avenue and running the lights, as well as almost colliding with me on sidewalks. I've also had words with light-running messengers by my office in midtown and twice I've witnessed messenger hit and runs.
If licensing cuts down on these offenses then that's cool with me.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 6:59am
#6
Thank You
Finally, some open discuss on this subject and not knee-jerk reactions.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 7:12am
#7
but what about the aesthetics?
in principle perhaps a good idea...more importantly, what are the aesthetics of the license itself? where would it go on the bike? can we get custom tags, vanity plates? i can see it now: the creativity of nycc'ers will manifest itself in entirely new directions. this issue could even redound to the benefit of cyclists to the degree it underscores the already legitimate right to ride in the streets, even in a CRITICAL MASS setting, if the traffic rules are obeyed. btw, emphasizing this approach alone would probably kill the bill.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 2:46pm
#8
A well intentioned boondoggle
The end result of this well intentioned but poorly thought out proposal will be that tens of thousand of hapless cyclists will be ticketed and perhaps incarcerated, etc by overzealous cops who should be doing more important tasks. Can you imagine the opportunities there are for an expanded bureaucracy to manage this odiocy?
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 7:36am
#9
John, you probably have more than one bike. Can get fairly expensive licensing every bike one owns.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 9:10am
#10
deleted (nm)
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 7:08am
#11
And while we're at it
"Let's require a license for all whom walk on the sidewalk. You know in case they jaywalk. They'll be subject to a fine, imprisonment or confiscation of their shoes.
At least Boston's registration plan is much more sensible and not a gross infringment of our civil liberties. Additionally, the locals provide some public awareness to safety issues and the disincentives of risky behvoir (e.g. lost work due to injury). In my opinion that educational approach is much more effective and likable than using the heavy hand appproach.
"
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 9:19am
#12
Accounting license
Linda,
How many incidents have you had or seen involving automobiles? Don't they bother you at least as much as those involving bicycles? Has licensure reduced the number of close calls, let alone the deaths and injuries, that drivers inflict on cyclists and pedestrians in this city?
Did you realize that from early October to early November, 11 adults and children were killed by automobiles in the five boroughs? That doesn't include the mutilations.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 10:21am
#13
Cars vs. bikes are not the issue
Hi Carol,
I don't understand your comparison. I made no mention of cars in my post...And hopefully I will never see a car riding on the sidewalk or going north on Columbus (actually I have seen this).
I have signed numerous petitions for a car-free park and added bike lanes throughout the city...again irrelevant to the issue at hand.
No one's civil liberties are at stake if they are required to get a license for their bikes. A bike moving at 25 mph through red light on Broadway is a dangerous vehicle. Period. And perhaps messengers and delivery people will be a bit more circumspect when breaking the law if it were easy to find them via a license. These are the offenders that can tarnish someone's view of bikes. And that should piss you off.
Instead of being so freakin' reactionary the TA should work towards requiring the license only of commercial riders and not having any fees attached to the license.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 11:04am
#14
Commercial vs. Recreational
"Linda
registering COMMERCIAL bikers is one thing. A blanket license registration for ALL cyclists is a totally different thing. And, also, 15 days in jail for not having a license on your bike?
There are several reasons why this bill is bad and the City Council shouldn't waste its time on it:
1) It's unenforceable
2) It's too broad, putting a dampen on bicycling across the board rather than on the ""problematic"" bikers (delivery/messengers)
3) The punishment is not commensurate to the offense.
And I could go on and on
There are more effective and just ways to deal with the delivery/messengers situation: my favourite one is the ""neighborhood cop"" (who by the way is the proven way to reduce all sorts of crimes). A guy who walks the same x times x blocks every day gets to know the dangerous delivery people and can assess heavy tickets on their employers ...
---R"
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 11:44am
#15
Dear Rosario...
"Please take the time to actually read my post and not over react to some pre-conceived idea of what I've said.
No need to shout 'commercial' at me since that is exactly my point.
""Instead of being so freakin' reactionary the TA should work towards requiring the license only of commercial riders and not having any fees attached to the license.""
You need to realize that most people don't differentiate between ""us"" and the messengers. It doesn't matter if its you on a Seven/Land Shark/Trek whatever or a messenger on a piece of poop fixie. Its all just bikes to them. But helping to make sure that the gross offenders can be held accountable is a step towards greater understanding.
We'll just have to agree to (somewhat) disagree ;-)
"
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 3:34pm
#16
Free Sevens
Instead of license plates, the government should provide free custom bicycles for all cyclists. (Sevens, Serottas etc.)
There is no reason for bike mnessengers, or anyone, to suffer the humiliation of riding a piece of poop fixie.
This is discrimination at its most virulent.
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 10:56pm
#17
Now, Now...
"Some of ""us"" NYCC cyclists ride ""piece of poop fixies"" too, you know?"
Sat, 11/20/2004 - 10:53am
#18
Dear Linda
"my response was actually directed to your previous post where you said
""If licensing cuts down on these offenses then that's cool with me.""
I assume that you meant ""licensing of everybody"" as per the Provenzano's bill. I guess you contradicted yourself later by saying the TA should only push for licensing commercial operators.
My point is that this bill is undefendable and there is nothing ""cool"" about it. The TA response is very much appropriate and I don't see the reason to go against it if not to be a ""cool"" contrarian ...
"
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 11:16am
#19
civil liberties
What the council member is proposing is 15 days imprisonment for not displaying a tag on your bicycle.
That's not very welcoming for out of town cyclists or to those who lost the plate 5 blocks back after hitting a pothole.
How do you plan securing the plate to your bike? It's hard enough to do such for the bike. Why would plate theft be any different? When I lose my plate or have my license suspended, I'll just be sure to snatch yours. ;-)
Also keep in mind driving without plates or without liability insurance in NYS only results in suspension of a drivers license - and you really have to work hard to make that happen. How many mortalities resulted from car accidents v bicycle related accidents?
Unlike moto driving, there are no fender benders riding a bike. If injury to the cyclist is not enough deterrent, than there's already criminal penalties on the book, i.e. assault, reckless endangerment as well as punitive damages, lawsuits, etc.
A bike moving at 25 mph through red light on Broadway has got bigger issues than being ticketed. Those that do, I suspect don't do so for very long - call it natural selection at work. I'd rather not have my liberties infringed upon at the expense of some ghoulish laws attempting to correct bad behavoir.
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 7:17am
#20
Musings
"""Has licensure reduced the number of close calls, let alone the deaths and injuries, that drivers inflict on cyclists and pedestrians in this city?""
Given your implication that the current automobile licensure and enforcement laws are ineffective, are you in favor of abolishing such laws? In all fairness, if you support freedom for cyclists, therefore, you must support freedom for drivers. Am I sensing a new found Libertarian streak in you? I can't wait. In addition to bike messengers going the wrong way on our streets, I look forward to the same from taxis!
Let's be realistic here. There is no organize plot on the part of motor vehicle drivers to kill cyclists, most accidents are simply that, not justification for manslaughter. Unlike Critical Mass rides, there is no organized plot on the part of motor vehicle drivers to jam our streets with traffic and disobey all traffic laws at their whim.
This is an aggressive city in which to drive. It always has been. Virtually everyone I know in the suburbs views New York City to be hostile to automobiles! The complaints are remarkably similar to those raised on this and other threads. Some inroads were made during the Giuliani administration; do you want to bring him back?
Still, I never feel freer than when I am on a bike. Either alone or in groups, within reason and safety, I go where I want to go and ride how I want to ride. Do I obey every traffic law? No, but never to the endangerment of myself (OK, some might argue this), and only accidentally as am impediment to traffic flow. Unlike my experiences as an automobile driver, when riding a bicycle I have never been stopped or ticketed, and the two times I needed help from the police they were responsive and courteous.
Can we make the city streets safer for all? Yes. Will licensing all cyclists help do so, probably not, but licensing bicycle messengers and delivery persons may help a bit to ease the clear danger they pose.
A better way to make cycling safer is via empowerment, and not the Critical Mass kind. Instead of crying victim and waiting for the city to do something, all cyclist would be safer if we all rode in exemplarily fashions. Perhaps then we will find some real allies in City Hall."
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 8:35am
#21
"John,
I don't have time to respond to your numerous mischaracterizations of my views, other than to say that they reflect certain assumptions and perhaps projections of your own.
However, I do take issue with your conclusion: ""All cyclist[s] would be safer if we rode in an exemplarily [sic] fashions [sic]""
Are you saying that all cyclists who are injured and killed in NYC are guilty of non-exemplary behavior? And that they therefore deserve their fate? Or that if they had behaved otherwise they would not have been harmed?
The messenger who was killed yesterday was riding on the side of the road but had to veer around a double-parked truck. When he was thrown to the ground and killed, he may have been doored, or he may have been stuck by the police van. Or maybe both. Had he been wearing a helmet, maybe it would have saved him, maybe not. Maybe he would have only been grievously injured for life.
Doesn't anyone besides me think that too many cars and trucks are allowed to clog the streets of New York City? They interfere with the free and safe movement of people and goods. They pollute the air. They promote a false sense of security in their occupants, and thus carelessness around others (e.g., dooring). They sometimes make their drivers insanely angry, who then go on to indulge in reckless conduct that results in so-called accidents that kill and maim other citizens who are simply unlucky enough to be in their path. And this happens over and over and over again.
At a minimum, it is highly curious that this ""right to drive"" is given a higher priority than the right to live. Practical reason, and a basic love for our fellow man, fall prostrate in our unmeasured worship of the automobile. Now that's kinky."
Sat, 11/20/2004 - 1:53am
#22
Richard instructs John in the law.
"John states, ""There is no organize(d) plot on the part of motor vehicle drivers to kill cyclists, most accidents are simply that, not justification for manslaughter.""
John, John, John. Wherefore do you summon and create the wholly imaginery specter that we're saying inconsiderate, inattentive, bully drivers conspire with one another to be that--your word, plot. No, they act individually as bullies, inconsiderate, reckless, incautious, inattentive drivers.
As for your thinking because they don't intend to kill someone, that exculpates them from a manslaughter charge, granted I dropped out of law school (not once, but twice), but you do know, don't you, you ARE responsible and liable for foreseeable consequences of your conduct.
Opening a door without looking has forseeable consequences.
Going through a red light has forseeable consequences.
Speeding has forseeable consequences.
Failure to signal a turn has forseeable consequences.
Turning from a non-turning lane has forseeable consequences.
...and a charge of manslaughter against those who kill in the course of the above should be one of the forseeable consequences. If it isn't, that's because there is no history of the police or DA bringing such charges against a driver for killing a cyclist. Or injuring him or her. At least not insofar as I know."
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 8:54am
#23
Been done
The idea of licensing commercial cyclists is definitely not a new one.
No time to research this now, but I believe it's already been done some years back. I seem to remember some sort of ID tags on delivery bikes. Can't recall if this regulation expired, was struck down in court, or was/is just not enforced.
But, practically speaking, c'mon... In a city of 16 million people, with 10 or 12 thousand cops on duty at any given time, do you really think the police are gonna pull over unlicensed cyclists?
I've had my shares of run-ins with delivery guys and messengers too. A little ol' fashioned street justice is all that's needed. Not very PC, but far more immediate and effective.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 8:20pm
#26
license plate !!
"I don't understand the rationale for the proposed bill. Is it intended to catch ""hit and run cyclist"" by ""reading"" the plate as they speed away ??..Or is the intention to stop cyclist from riding on the sidewalk, riding the wrong way,going through red lights,endangering the general public,or making illegal turns or other infractions,if so, then why not inforce the current law ????.Some near-sighted person just spit out a silly idea w/out giving it much thought.a very typical reaction from most politicians....... why not educate?? a lot of illegal riding cyclist don't know they are breaking the law.A lot of motorist/passengers don't know the proper way to enter/exit autos. My leg is still B& B from the shot I took when a passenger opened a car door in my face last week and then in all his ignorence decleared that I should have been riding on the opposite side of the street, AGAINST TRAFFIC... After hearing that, i just trew up my hands, straighten my handlebars, licked my wounds and went on my merry way........ Ciao Tony Mantione"
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 12:38pm
#27
Let's promote an anti-politician bill
I think we should promote an anti-politician bill and have them licensed and forced to wear number plates. That might shut them up, especially when they get ticketed or thrown in jail.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 2:06pm
#28
save such stories for the tories
nyc's longstanding history of being a one party town doesn't help.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 2:28pm
#29
bike messenger killed
A deadly accident in Midtown Manhattan claimed the life of a bike messenger Thursday.
The incident happened at the intersection of 49th Street and Eighth Avenue. Police say the messenger was passing between a police van and a double- parked delivery truck when someone in the truck opened the door.
Police say the messenger struck the door and was thrown to the ground head-first. He died at the scene
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 2:51pm
#30
I'm surely sad that yet another cyclist has been killed. But putting on this thread seems misplaced.
Whether or not that messenger had been licensed would have made no difference. The jerkoff who doubleparked his truck still would have gotten off. His insurance won't be increased, and he'll continue to doublepark day after day, no matter how many people he endangers.
Anybody who thinks this bill is a good idea ought to just move to California, and sit on the friggin' freeway during rush hour. NYC is becoming more like LA every year because of lousy transportation policy. The City Council should be doing everything it can to encourage cycling.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 7:59pm
#31
Newsday report/Memorial ride Friday
"Thanks for the notice, Herb. Clearly, cyclists--errant or otherwise--are not the worst problem facing this city at present. It feels stupid to have to state something so obvious.
Police investigate a fatal bike accident.
BY DARYL KHAN AND JOSHUA ROBIN
Staff Writers
November 18, 2004, 4:27 PM EST
A bike messenger was killed yesterday morning when he fell headfirst from his bike in midtown after a delivery person opened a truck door and knocked him down, police said.
Around 10:45 a.m., the messenger, whom police did not identify, was riding north on Eighth Avenue near 49th Street. He tried to negotiate a narrow space between a double-parked delivery truck and a police prisoner transport van, police sources on the scene said.
That's when he slammed into a door opened by one of the delivery men in the truck, according to the police account.
It's a phenomenon known to bike messengers as ""dooring,"" an unfortunate and common -- but not usually fatal -- part of life while knifing through the city on a bike.
After the accident, a spilled cup of coffee and a muffin, which police believe the messenger was carrying, lay on the street beside him. The cyclist was the 14th killed in the city this year.
While police blamed the death on the truck's door, an official from Vesuvio Foods Co., the company that owns the truck, said his driver says the police van hit the cyclist.
Steve Manning, a Vesuvio vice president, said his drivers did not open the door until after they heard a thump on the side of the truck.
They looked out and saw the victim, 42, lying in the street, blood pouring from his head, he said.
""His door was shut,"" Manning said, speaking from his office in Edison, N.J. ""He heard an impact on his door --a bang, a clang, a crash. He opened the door and he found a bent up bicycle and a bicyclist lying in the street.""
According to his driver and his helper, it was the police van moving at a
high rate of speed that threw the cyclist into the door.
Manning said Vesuvio would continue to investigate.
A police official said that after a thorough investigation by both the Accident Investigation Squad and Internal Affairs, police discovered fresh marks on the truck's passenger door consistent with the dead cyclist's bike.
""They went over the PD vehicle and there were no fresh marks on it whatsoever,"" the official said. ""I am confident in the investigation, it was thorough. It appears to be an unfortunate accident caused by the door
of the delivery truck."" The cyclist was not wearing a helmet.
After three hours of questioning, the police let the drivers make their delivery of Pellegrino water, eggs, oil and vinegar to Ciro Trattoria, a nearby restaurant.
Police did not issue a summons for double parking, but did issue a ticket for a slash in one of the trucks tires. The ticket will be squashed if the tire is repaired in 48 hours.
In the wake of the accident, more than a dozen messengers stopped to bear witness to the loss of one of their own.
""It's a tight-knit community,"" Ken Stanek said. ""Even though no one really knows this guy it still affects all of us because that could be anyone of us.""
""They just don't care,"" said bike messenger Robert Brennon, 32, of the cars and trucks in the city. ""It's a dangerous job, man.""
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/manhattan/nycbike1119,0,2478983.stor...
==================================================
> From: TIME'S UP!
> Fellow Cyclist/Messenger Killed in Midtown (victim of an apparent dooring)
>
> This morning, November 18th 2004, a messenger was killed at 49th Street and 8th Avenue. When a death happens in our community, it is a tragedy that effects us all. There will be a vigil & memorial ride for him on Friday, November 19th at 6pm @ 49th & 8th Ave. Bring flowers and your support.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 2:44pm
#32
License guns? License cars? License pushcarts?
I don't relish the idea of having to schlepp a license around on my bike (or wear one on my back) while out for a Sunday ride. But I think the level of ire against licenses here is a wee bit out of hand, folks.
It reminds me of the rage we hear from the gun lobby when there are attempts at Federal or state gun licensing laws.
To repeat, I don't want to carry or wear a bicycle license. I don't favor it for any save commercial riders. But there's no civil rights issue here. The U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee a right to ride an unlicensed bike (Or drive an unlicensed car. Or peddle -- not pedal -- hot dogs from an unlicensed pushcart.)
Are some politicians being either dense or opportunistic about this, demanding that every bike rider have a license? You betcha! But will I man the ramparts over this, given everything else happening on the planet? Including in Washington? And Iraq? And Iran? And...and...
Well anyway, the answer is, nooop!
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 4:15pm
#33
I really don't have a problem with having to license my bike. I definitely think the delivery boys need to start getting tickets. These guys go screaming up the sidewalk with five bags on a half functional bike. Bike messengers seem to be a bit better.
I wouldn't support this idea though. These NYC kids are lazy as can be to begin with. I've worked with some kids teaching them about fitness. Seriously most looked like they have either spent 6 months in a hospital bed and atrophied or eaten themselves into high blood pressure and high cholesterol by the time they are 16. No we are gonna plan on making it even harder for them to take up riding?
I think sometimes maybe we NYers all need an attitude adjustment Hank Williams style.
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 5:29pm
#34
licenses and Bike NY (nm)
Can you envision the scene at the start of Bike New York
wirh police checking each and every one of the 30,000 bikes for a license tag?
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 5:33pm
#35
Maybe bikes could be classed as items of clothing
If you ride a bike with a pedal system involving cleat attachment to shoe, or rat traps, couldn't you say that technically you are wearing the bicycle, therefore it is an item of clothing and not subject to vehicle licensing laws?
Thu, 11/18/2004 - 7:27pm
#36
No one seems to have homed in on the practicality issue. All autos in the US, regardless of the state of origin, are registered. All drivers (to be legal) are licensed. All 50 states acknowledge each others licensing and registration.
Now... how does this work for the cyclist from outside the City of New York. Is he/she exempt from the city ordnance, will he/she be tossed in jail for 15 days, will his/her bike be impounded?
As it stands right now, I CAN be cited and fined for breaking traffic laws. Run a red light... get a ticket.
Do we really need a whole new registration system in NYC? Probably not. This may just be a way for some City Council member to get their name in the paper.
George
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 6:20am
#37
Money$
Or a way to raise revenue.
$25 a bike adds up fast.
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 6:28am
#38
The point is safety
Registration of bikes is besides the point if what is intended is the wearing of an ID tag. Any tag that will fit comfortably and safely on a bike will be too small to read from any distance as to its number(identity.) Registration of bikes for safety checks is another issue that is not addressed here and is probably not an important issue. If the public wants protection against dangerous and unlawful riding, just enforce the laws on the books. There are plenty of infractions and plenty of cops. If the police feel they are missing violators due to their obvious identity, just send undercover officers out to do the job. The fines collected will certainly pay for the effort.
Mon, 11/22/2004 - 4:47pm
#39
The point is police control
Perhaps I've missed others saying this in the thread above, but I think the point of this bill is not safety or dealing with messengers, and not for it to be generally enforced. Judging only from (a) the ludicrous (for many of us) proportions of the license the bill would require and (b) the draconian punishment it provides, I'd say the point is that the Councilwoman and the police probably expect that it won't be generally enforced and that people won't generally get the license. Rather, the point seems to be allow the police to stop behavior they don't like (read Critical Mass, etc.) by pulling out the threat of big jail time whenever they see a rider without the license doing something they don't like. I don't know anything much about local politics, but it seems to be not to outside the realm of possibility, that the police high-ups found a friendly Councilwoman to provide them a stick to put in their back pockets to deal with unruly cyclists.
Or am I being too cynical?
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 6:53am
#40
deleted
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 8:31am
#41
food for thought
"first and foremost, let me say i hold myself just as responsible as anyone for continuing the problem. and yes, i know this is slightly off topic for this thread, but it is in response to some comments made above.
to all of us who decry the dangerous cycling of delivery people: how many of us get home from work hungry and tired and pick up the phone to order dinner?
to all of us who decry the dangerous cycling of messengers: how many of us use a messenger service when they or their company need something sent across town immediately?
to all of us who decry double-parked delivery vans: fedex, ups, etc. do it at least as often as anyone else. how many of us order something from a catalog or on-line and want it delivered by one of those companies?
how long would these problems continue if everyone who complained about them stopped patronizing the restaurants, messenger services, etc. in question? or, put another way, are we giving them our tacit approval to continue their practices by giving them our money?
""the fault, dear brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves."""
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 11:26am
#42
Food for what thought?
Yeah, and John Gotti and his mob used to throw free fireworks parties every July 4th for the nabe.
Not to mention that Hitler built the autobahns and even Jews sometimes drive on them.
Sorry, but I just can't see overlooking gross violations of the law that endanger the lives of innocent people just because somebody orders egg drop soup over the phone.
The messengers can deliver the soup riding a bike with lights affixed front and rear, obeying traffic laws and not riding on the sidewalks.
Fri, 11/19/2004 - 2:18pm
#43
you totally missed my point
"i'm NOT saying we should overlook the gross violations. i'm saying maybe if everyone boycotts the restuaruants, etc. which use bad delivery people (and tell the restaurants why we're boycotting), the problem will get cleared up faster.
""money talks..."""
Sat, 11/20/2004 - 3:14pm
#44
And again I ask, food for what thought?
"The post above this one says:
""i'm NOT saying we should overlook the gross violations. i'm saying maybe if everyone boycotts the restuaruants, etc. which use bad delivery people (and tell the restaurants why we're boycotting), the problem will get cleared up faster.""
Which restaurant has the bad delivery people? Do you know? If you see someone on the street running down pedestrians do you know what restaurant or delivery service he is from? Can you possibly know unless he wears a sign and license plate identifying himself?
You certainly can't know if you're talking about the guy who delivers your own food -- or if I'm talking about the guy who delivers my food.
Think: if you're sitting home waiting for your delivery, you won't know whether the guy who rings your doorbell with your dinner ran down an old lady on the sidewalk on the way over, strictly obeyed all the rules, walked the food over, or parachuted in from the Planet Nictu.
So what are you thinking? Only asking.
"
Mon, 11/22/2004 - 8:51am
#45
No of Planet Nictu delivery please
I'd like the number of the restaurant that delivers from the Planet Nictu please.
Mon, 11/22/2004 - 9:20am
#46
what i'm thinking...
"do you ever pick up your phone and order food to be delivered? if so, then it's almost a guarantee you're guilty of supporting the delivery people who bomb down the sidewalk. (has anyone ever seen a food delivery person actually walk their bike on the sidewalk? i haven't.)
and when you've seen a delivery person bomb down the sidewalk AND their bag has the restaurant logo, have you ever made the mental note to boycott that restaurant and tell them why? if not, then it's almost a guarantee, yadda, yadda, yadda.
and again, i'm just as guilty as the next person. i order my food occasionally and curse the delivery people i have to dodge more than occasionally.
but if one really wants to avoid seeing the connection between one's desire to have hot food delivered from a restaurant cheaply and quickly and the dangerous delivery people riding their bikes on the sidewalk or the wrong way down one-way streets, i can't force them.
dorothy parker, when asked to use the word ""horticulture"" in a sentence, quipped, ""You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think."""
