"Zoot Katz" <
[email protected]> wrote
> diffusing tense situations. The Jeep jerk crossed the line when he hit the bikes or people with
> his vehicle.
>
> If this guy was trying to get away from the cyclists and not heading further into the mass, then
> yeah, I'll agree their actions were extreme, providing that no one had yet been hit. If he was
> heading into the rest of the mass then it makes sense to contain him. If he was trying to flee
> after hitting the person, then he's blessedly lucky to have not been meted his due.
Here's an excerpt from another article on the same website where the video-captures are located:
"Yes, when the cyclists stopped traffic on Congress when the cyclists illegally ran a red light,
Mike Henderson probably should have just sat on his horn like the rest of the drivers and just
tolerated the delay. But he didn't. He went around the traffic and stopped at the next intersection.
Too aggressive? Maybe. But we as Austin drivers all know how many aggressive offenses we witness a
day that go unpunished. If a police officer doesn't witness it, basically it didn't happen.
Henderson then came to the next intersection and stopped at the traffic light -- which is where all
this mess begins. The cyclists, apparently quite like Gomer Pyle, decided they had the authority to
make a citizen's arrest for Henderson's aggressive driving. Now, even if they did actually believe
that they had the authority to detain Henderson, I ask you, did any single person in the group
actually make a call or seek out police so that the proper authorities could intervene? I'll answer
this one for you -- no. Absolutely not. There is no record of a report of an aggressive driver at
First and Congress, and even if there were a call -- the cyclists absolutely still did not have the
authority to detain Henderson. By the way, the cyclists also harassed the passenger. "Accomplice to
the crime" -- is that his charge, Gomer?"
So, here are the events as reported in various articles. First, CM cyclists illegally block the
intersection of Second and Congress. The Jeep driver went around them when the light turned green
possibly squealing his tires, but otherwise without incident. The cyclists followed him to the
intersection of Chavez and Congress. At least one placed himself and his bicycle in front of the
Jeep. Words and spittle were exchanged between the cyclists and both the Jeep driver and passenger.
At least one of the Jeep tires was slashed. The Jeep driver decided to leave the situation and did
so aggressively, running over a bike then hitting a Honda in the process. Fisticuffs ensued between
the driver and two cyclists.
It looks to me like the normal CM tactics, combined with an upset driver and followed up by cyclist
vigilantees, led to a dangerous situation. If the chain had been broken at any point - CM cylists
did not block the first intersection; the driver didn't go around them; the cyclists didn't follow,
block the Jeep with a human/bicycle road block and harrass them - then the situation would not have
made the evening news.
But this is standard procedure for CM. In an effort to keep the ride together, they routinely block
intersections. The "peacable" protest to show that bicycles are a part of traffic actually works to
hinder traffic. They break traffic laws on every ride. Not a great example of how bicycles are
supposed to be a part ofthe normal flow of traffic, now is it? Their claims that cars cause a
greater traffic jam are only partly true. Auto drivers are well aware that if they are sitting in an
intersection when the light changes, they are subject to a ticket. CM cyclists believe that because
the are "protestors," they are above the law.
Then factor in the numerous accounts of them spitting on cars, kicking cars, verbally abusing
motorists, etc., it's no wonder so many cyclists see CM as a poor representation of their interests.
-Buck
