Re: Cycling and social policy

On 6/1/2025 10:15 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/31/2025 8:19 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 5/31/2025 11:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:

https://nypost.com/2025/05/30/opinion/lefties-pro-migrant- push-back- on- tischs-e-bike-crackdown-is-obscene/

>
The New York Post trades heavily in sensationalism and political divisiveness.
>
Here was the main point in the New York Times article I linked on this issue: "Cyclists who blow through red lights without endangering anyone else can now be forced to appear in court. Drivers who commit the same violation cannot." As I presently noted here, immigrants, legal or not, were barely mentioned. Complaints centered around the fact that bikes or ebikes are a tiny portion of pedestrian risk - motor vehicles are far, far more dangerous - but motoring offenses are treated far more lightly.
>
And regarding the incident linked within your NYP article regarding a 3-year-old girl getting knocked down when she ran into a protected bike lane: Both the article describing it and the bulk of reader comments faulted the design of the bike lane, not the fact that it was an ebike. If there was _any_ mention of immigrants, it was minor. (I'm one of those who think that facility design is nuts.)
>
Finally, let's please remember that most immigrants are legal. Many do take low paying jobs, including things like food delivery, but that does not make them into illegals.
>

 I found the 'discrimination toward illegals' argument interesting in a macabre sort of way.
 And yes, I agree with you that most foreigners here are legally present. I am a strong proponent of clarity to distinguish among newly naturalized citizens, temporary visa holders, resident aliens and illegal aliens. Conflating those is dishonest if not pernicious.
 

And yet you had no problem conflating a comment from a community activist who said e-bike legislation was an attempt to marginalize the immigrant community with support for illegal immigration.