Liste des Groupes | Revenir à rb tech |
On 6/3/2025 5:16 AM, zen cycle wrote:The snip from the article was the opinion of the author(s), not an accurate representation of what they were complaining about which was:On 6/1/2025 10:15 AM, AMuzi wrote:It was not I.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.
From the report linked above:
"The proof? How they used a budget hearing to assail NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch for deciding to issue criminal summonses to law-breaking e-bike riders, instead of mere traffic-court tickets, to discourage reckless road behavior.
Their gripe?
A lot of e-bike riders are delivery drivers for food apps, and a lot of delivery drivers are illegal immigrants — who might get deported if slapped with a criminal summons."
And yes, I did find that interesting in a macabre sort of way.
The argument is no different than Orville Faubus' flouting of federal law. People do remember that Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to forcibly desegregate Little Rock Central High in 1958. This is widely regarded as an appropriate, bold and noble decision and I heartily agree. What most people do not remember is that eventually Federal soldiers left, and Central High was closed in defiance. Our present situation is yet a moving drama and not over by a long shot.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.