Biking in Boston

[FK4]

Cden, agree with all of the above.

Jeff, yes, the single sentence is a more concise summation of my blather.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Cden, agree with all of the above.

Jeff, yes, the single sentence is a more concise summation of my blather.

Cden, I also agree with your comment above.

I am not blaming the victim. But from a personal risk calculus standpoint, I would not ride on Comm Ave at 3 AM. Heck, I don't like driving at 3 AM because of all the drunk drivers at that hour!

It is called risk mitigation.

 

[jass]

If women never left the house they wouldnt be victims.

Its just common sense. Frankly, it's irresponsible for them to be putting themselves into those types of risky situations to begin with.

But if they do leave the house they should wear a full body cover to lower their risk. And they should be with a man (relative) at all times.

The odds of a creep following a single woman home is much higher if they dont have a full body cover and family escort. Thats simply a fact.

In short, it is not monstrous to recognize that going outside is a lot more dangerous than staying indoors. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something. When my caliph tells me I shouldn't be out wandering the streets I don't call him a monster. I call him prudent.

 

[DZH22]

In short, it is not monstrous to recognize that 3 in the morning is a more dangerous time to be outdoors than, say, anytime between 5am - 12pm. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something. When my dad tells me I shouldn't be out wandering the streets alone after midnight, I don't call him a monster. I call him prudent.

In short, it is not monstrous to recognize that going outside is a lot more dangerous than staying indoors. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something. When my caliph tells me I shouldn't be out wandering the streets I don't call him a monster. I call him prudent.

Because going out by yourself at 3 am vs. just leaving the house at all are exactly the same thing when you live in a fairy tale utopian society.

Come quick everybody! It looks like we have actually been communicating with somebody from another planet, ever since July 2006! It's a true miracle of science!

 

[jass]

Because going out by yourself at 3 am vs. just leaving the house at all are exactly the same thing when you live in a fairy tale utopian society.

Jesus christ you are one dense motherfucker.

Why would someone be out at 3am?

Maybe they work at a bar that closes at 2am. So their shift ends at 2:30am to account for cleaning. So theyre commuting at 3am.

Under you "blame the victim" jihad, this person should give up their employment and economic security because "daddy says you shouldnt be out after midnight".

But why midnight? Its more dangerous to be out after dark.

So maybe 8pm.

Or 4pm in the winter.

Maybe they should marry a nice man who can ensure they dont have to expose themselves to risk.


You COULD choose to blame the person who KILLED SOMEONE.

You COULD choose to blame the road design which allowed this to happen.

But no, let's go after the victim. If only they had stayed home this never would have happened.

 

[DZH22]

Jesus christ you are one dense motherfucker.

Why would someone be out at 3am?

.................................

But no, let's go after the victim. If only they had stayed home this never would have happened.

I didn't say why, and I didn't say let's go after the victim. I made an observation that being out by yourself at 3 am, REGARDLESS OF BUSINESS OR MODE OF TRANSPORTATION, is essentially taking your life into your own hands. You extrapolated everything else by a magnitude of 100 and have all the credibility of a chimpanzee by going unreasonably overboard with your comparisons.

 

[BuilditDenser]

Risk mitigation is a thing. I chose not to wear an Italian suit at 3am in South Side Chicago because i can reduce my risk. Sure, If i got mugged/shot, it would be the perpetrator's fault, but I would have some responsibility for putting myself in that situation.

Similarly, bikers have to reduce the risks they take too. this isn't rocket science or anything that crazy. It is the same reason why biker's should have lights on their bikes - risk reduction.

 

[Randomgear]

If you guys are so afraid of the dark, perhaps it's time you move back in with your parents.

 

[jass]

Risk mitigation is a thing. I chose not to wear an Italian suit at 3am in South Side Chicago because i can reduce my risk. Sure, If i got mugged/shot, it would be the perpetrator's fault, but I would have some responsibility for putting myself in that situation.

Similarly, bikers have to reduce the risks they take too. this isn't rocket science or anything that crazy. It is the same reason why biker's should have lights on their bikes - risk reduction.

Theres a difference between mitigating risk, by using a light, versus removing risk, which is what the American Taliban up there is demanding with "dont go out at night and if you do dont be surprised when you die"

 

[DZH22]

Risk mitigation is a thing.....

Just so we are clear about how this conversation has gone:

"We agree with this statement." - DZH22, FK4, JeffDowntown

"Pussy!!!" - Randomgear
"Monster!!!" - fattony
"Taliban!!!" - jass

To sum it up:
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain

"It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person." - Bill Murray


Let's all give a round of applause to the Pussy Monster Taliban crowd for "winning" another argument.

 

[FK4]

"It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person." - Bill Murray

Or people that have no manners.

 

[Arlington]

Risk mitigation is a thing. I chose not to wear an Italian suit at 3am in South Side Chicago because i can reduce my risk. Sure, If i got mugged/shot, it would be the perpetrator's fault, but I would have some responsibility for putting myself in that situation.

Similarly, bikers have to reduce the risks they take too. this isn't rocket science or anything that crazy. It is the same reason why biker's should have lights on their bikes - risk reduction.

I applaud your desire for bikers to reduce risks, but I have to correct the idea that some readers might glean that lights are optional.

Analogy fails:
- Italian suits are legally optional.
- Going at 3am to bad neighborhoods at 3am is legally optional
- Helmets are legally optional (if you are of age)
- Bike lights are not optional (they are legally required at night)

- Wearing a nice suit does not shift legal blame for theft
- Being in the wrong place does not shift legal blame for other crime
- Helmets aren't supposed to shift blame (but can you trust a jury?)
- Failing to light & reflect can and does shift legal blame.

It is not simply victim blaming to say "he didn't have a headlight" or "he didn't have rear reflectors". These are more than just free choices of dress and place that the law must ignore, they are, in fact, legally salient, admissible facts that can and do shift the blame from other operators and onto the cyclist.

When a lack of lights allows blame to get tagged on the cyclist, DAs fail to prosecute (or reduce the charge) and Insurance Companies pay less to the cyclist (or pay slower)

Hence, my desire to force-educate "the market" by requiring all bikes sold new(or discharged from repair) have all required safety gear:

White headlight
Red rear reflector or light
Yellow pedal reflectors or anklets

 

[Randomgear]

Just so we are clear about how this conversation has gone:

"We agree with this statement." - DZH22, FK4, JeffDowntown

"Pussy!!!" - Randomgear
.

Hey DZ, get with the tiimes why don't you; these days pussy is about power and self determination. Don't slander it.

And remember to wear your helmet when you drive your car, you are far more likely to use it when driving.

 

[autonomy]

Nobody is making light of what happened. Of course it's tragic. All FK4 is pointing out is that it is a risky proposition to be out at that time of night. Basically, don't be out if you don't have to, and if you do, be vigilant regarding your surroundings! I don't see it as blaming the victim at all. It should be common sense that being out at 3 am is riskier than practically any other time of day, no matter what business you have or vehicle you are using.

So what is the bloody point of this argument then? A man is killed and all you can find to say is "jeez, it sure is dangerous out there in the middle of the night". What's the point of you saying anything in this case?


On point: Cambridge Landscaping has been removing trees along Fresh Pond Parkway where the train tracks are... does this mean the project to connect to the Paul Dudley bike path is moving ahead full steam?

 

[DZH22]

So what is the bloody point of this argument then? A man is killed and all you can find to say is "jeez, it sure is dangerous out there in the middle of the night". What's the point of you saying anything in this case?

Personally I came to the defense of a poster who was getting trashed over it. What is the bloody point of vilifying somebody over a comment about staying safe and avoiding certain roads at certain times of day?

Also, it shouldn't have been an argument at all except that "stay safe" was met with "fuck you" and "take it to breitbart." It still shocks me when I see some of the things people get offended about nowadays. So I jumped into the fray and here we are, 2 pages later. If the initial reaction to FK4 was measured and reasonable, I wouldn't have said a word.

 

[FK4]

^No online news in the last month, but a lot of Watertown stuff to report (I'd put Watertown stuff in here, not the burbs, but a mod can feel free to move):

http://www.watertownmanews.com/2017/04/29/see-the-projects-that-public-works-will-work-on-this-year/

There's quite a lot of stuff on here that's bike-related. Also refers to reconstruction of Common Street, Cambridge's plan to rebuild its portion of Belmont Street, and a MassDOT study to redesign Arsenal Street which is huge.

Mount Auburn Street Planning and Designs

The transformation of Mount Auburn Street into a Complete Street has been a priority for the Town of Watertown since 2007, when it began a series of public workshops and conceptual designs for what was initially limited to the Coolidge Square business district, but was soon extended to its current project limits once the need was realized. The Town has embarked on a reimagining and redesign of Mount Auburn Street, from the Cambridge City line to Patten Street.

Mount Auburn Street is an approximately 2 mile long urban principal arterial connecting Watertown Square on the west with the City of Cambridge on the east. Land use along the corridor is medium-density commercial and residential. The roadway travels through the Coolidge Square business district and past Watertown High School and Hosmer Elementary School. The roadway, which is under Town jurisdiction but carries State Route 16, was last reconstructed by MassHighway as an Urban Systems project in the early 1980s with little regard to users other than through traffic.

The proposed project will transform the corridor into a Complete Street. The pavement surface will be rehabilitated by pavement milling and overlay with limited areas of additional patching where necessary. The roadway will be reconfigured to provide one travel lane and one 5-foot-wide on-street bicycle lane in each direction, left turn bays at selected intersections, bus turnouts, curb extensions at selected locations to shorten crossing distances, and wider sidewalks with additional green spaces and green infrastructure. Among the benefits are:

• Increased efficiency on the MBTA route 71 trackless trolley due to improved traffic operations and the potential for transit signal priority and/or queue jump lanes. The project is coordinating with the MBTA and the DCR Fresh Pond/Mt. Auburn Street corridor study.

Discussions with the MBTA include replacement of overhead catenary wires, which will improve bus operations by reducing breakdowns. Bus stop locations were previously studied as part of the MBTA Priority bus route program and will be revisited as needed.

• Wider sidewalks for pedestrians, including shorter crossing distances through the use of bump-outs, and improved pedestrian signal equipment. Pedestrian visibility at mid-block crosswalks will be improved using bump-outs, warning signage, and flashing beacons, where warranted.

• Bicycle travel time and connectivity to the regional bicycle network would be improved by the addition of bicycle lanes to the corridor, as well as signage directing bicyclists to other on- and off-street bicycle routes, including the Watertown Community Path andWatertown-Cambridge Greenway. Providing bicycle facil ities on the road will significantly improve safety for the estimated 360 bicyclists that travel the corridor daily.

 

[FK4]

This is also a pretty good list --

https://www.reddit.com/r/bikeboston/comments/64rq0c/bike_infrastructure_projects_in_2017/

Reminds one of how far behind Boston is versus Cambridge in actually making real bike infrastructure. It's a shame, since just ten years ago it was Menino who was behind striping basic bike lanes on every major road in Boston, seemingly overnight... but now the city is a little stuck.

 

[FK4]

^I would guess a lot of the clientele is older, other than the weekend breakfast crowd. While I'm in favor of the changes, I don't think the misgivings of business owners is surprising, unforgivable, or unreasonable.

 

[fattony]

As an aside, the owner of the S&S spoke and is a complete goober and was shouted down after giving a 10 minute add for S&S while contributing nothing to the conversation.

Was that guy seriously suggesting a full time police detail to fix the intersection?

Glad you guys came out too. S&S guy was a real Delta-Bravo. He could have said his piece with less grandstanding and hostility.

 

[FK4]

I don't think anyone has mentioned this on here, but Mass Ave southbound between Boylston and Saint Stephen now has protected lanes are separated from parking. In front of the giant cement building across from the CSC, cyclists are actually routed onto the sidewalk which is now painted as a sort of "cycle track".