Re: Cycling and social policy

On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 06:16:31 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

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.

..because that's what it was.  What other reason would the NYT have to
publish that nonsense?

--
C'est bon
Soloman