Don't get a
permit
When local police learn of your
ride, they may insist that you get a permit, perhaps a
parade permit. Don't do it. The point of Critical Mass is
that biking is a right, not a privilege. Cars don't need
permits to ride on the streets, and neither should cyclists.
They may threaten to arrest you if you ride without a
permit. At that point you'll need to consider whether you're
willing to get arrested to make your point. If you're not,
and you choose not to ride or choose to get the permit, then
you've allowed them to "put cyclists in their place". It's
not an easy choice for some. (Austin CM was told it needed a
permit, refused to get one, and then suffered arrests of
riders. CM'ers went to court and either won their cases, or
had them thrown out of court.)
Here's the experience of
Portland,
Oregon CM'ers in November 2002.
One rider writes:
The police have been furiously lobbying for two
utterly counterproductive concessions: no corking and a
parade permit. After much maneuvering, just before the
November ride they found a brand new masser (one ride
under his belt - on which he was injured by a car) fool
enough to apply for a permit. Then convened a hasty and
confusing meeting between city officials and whatever
massers they could round up, and produced the most
Rashomon ride ever. I mean, all Critical Mass rides are
like the blind man and the elephant, but this one took
the cake.
Another rider notes:
I realize that the Portland police are eager to
see a version of Critical Mass that has no impact on the
city, and that a participant has come forward that
appears willing to join with you in this effort. I am
sure you are savvy enough to realize that this has very
little chance of succeeding (owing to the very nature of
the Critical Mass phenomena).
I participate in Critical Mass in Madison Wisconsin,
and last April when a cyclist went to the effort of
obtaining a permit and planning a route, participants
abandoned that route within 10 minutes.
Have you considered the long term impact of this
course of action? I imagine when the permitted ride is
abandoned, the Police will have an excuse to take more
extreme action than normal because Critical Mass has
broken an agreement with the city. The problem is, there
is no organization, no leaders, and therefore no
accountability for one rider's actions based on another
riders promises. However, this will not stop the Police
from claiming that the participants have broken an
agreement.
If I as a motorist were to promise on behalf of all
other motorists in Portland not to block traffic by
participating in rush hour (i.e.. creating congestion) by
taking up a single lane and sticking to a pre planned
route, would the Police then take action during the next
rush hour to punish Portland Motorists for breaking my
agreement? After all, motorists who are impeding the
normal (i.e.. at speed limit) flow of traffic are
breaking the law. I doubt it.
And this I think reveals the true nature of your
relationship with Critical Mass - you are undertaking
this course of action for purely political reasons. While
there are a plethora of life threatening acts of motorist
lawbreaking going on all around the city, the political
problems brought about by Critical Mass outweigh the
public safety, thus justifying taking resources away from
normal traffic enforcement.
I would suggest that instead of trying to neuter
Critical Mass by encouraging non representatives to make
agreements on behalf of people they do not represent, and
then having the Police enforce laws that have
comparatively little positive effect on public safety,
that you instead work with the city and riders to change
the laws that make participating in a "bicycle rush hour"
any more against the law than participating in a car rush
hour. I would certainly appreciate any information you
might give me as to why this course of action is not
possible.
back to
the Hub
|
Critical-Mass.info
