Critical Mass = Legal

BBC Article

thats a shame.

why the opposition to Critical Mass on this forum?

Well, leaving snot-boy's comment aside, what, if anything, has Critical Mass achieved?

Loads of people out riding their bikes through London's famous London on a friday night instead of rotting their faces off in front of the telly. A chance for angry lcc members to shout at the police.

Well, leaving snot-boy's comment aside, what, if anything, has Critical Mass achieved?

You may as well say what did the Greenham Common women achieve...

They kept demonstrating, despite the abuse and the huge amounts of negative publicity and forced their issue onto the front pages and headlines.....and eventually change happened...

Parallels can be drawn with Critical Mass....it takes the issue directly to thousands of people who may not have considered it and generates a hell of a lot of publicity for cycling isssues, which encourages debate and who knows, maybe one day, change.

i will still go, i think it will be less fun, but who know maybe there will be less soap dodgers this time.

Well, leaving snot-boy's comment aside, what, if anything, has Critical Mass achieved?

Well... read that BBC article

Personally, I never got around to doing one. The idea of cycling slowly around crowded streets seems the opposite of what I enjoy about cycling.

However, cycling has doubled (ish) in recent years, which in my opinion can only be a good thing. Whether critical mass had anything to do with that is debatable.

However, the concept of CM is that once you reach a certain point, cycling becomes an acceptable alternative to public transport. Judging by the number of bikes on the roads, I think that point has been reached. The more people cycle, the safer it gets thus encouraging more cyclists.

The number of regular journeys by bike may have made Critical Mass obsolete. The original point of it, back in the '90s, was to show traffic that bikes have a right ot the road. That's pretty much established now.

If you mean my post it's a question not a point of view. As for snot-boy who knows why he thinks any of the things he thinks?

Well, leaving snot-boy's comment aside, what, if anything, has Critical Mass achieved?

Aside from a crappy platform for activism, it's let individual cyclists know that they don't have to suck up shitty driving from motorists and they they're not alone in wanting things to change.

Back when it was all new and shiny it would have proved a point and possibly made some people think differently. Now it's like kids stabbing each other. It's too frequent for it to have much social effect.

Hopefully cyclists will take up an idea put forward by a Globe & Mail journo in Toronto. Instead of a monthly ride on a Friday night, all cyclists should rent cars and drive to work on a Monday morning at about 8am.

The original point of it, back in the '90s, was to show traffic that bikes have a right ot the road. That's pretty much established now.

Do you live in the UK?

If you mean my post it's a question not a point of view. As for snot-boy who knows why he thinks any of the things he thinks?

By asking "if anything" you are immddiately positioning yourself on the 'against' side of the argument so you are stating an opinion as much as asking a question.

Even aside from the good answers above as to what it has achieved you could also ask, why shouldn't people be allowed to attend take part in Critical Mass? Anyone who disagrees with the right to do it agrees with public censorship and police control of our freedom of movement

i agree with will about the common and cm.

Do you live in the UK?
Yep. And ride ever day in London.

You do get the occasional dick yelling at you, but you get that in a car too. So we have a measure of equality.

Yeh change happened; Labour dropped it's policy of unilateralism and is now planning to spend up to 100 billion on new Tridents. I think it's very worthwhile asking what Greenham Common achieved.

Change happened after the Greenham period disarmourment, decommissioning and ending of the cold war....the ladies were not responsible for this, but they did increase public awareness, which in turn changed public opinion and eventually policies....

It was a very long time ago Will, we are in a new epoch, change has happened again.

Thanks for patronising me; I did read it.

Sorry mate didn't mean to be patronising - I just assumed that you hadn't read it, as it detailed something that the mass had achieved

Well, leaving snot-boy's comment aside, what, if anything, has Critical Mass achieved?

It's fun.

Does it have to achieve anything?

It's managed to get me and a friend from uni to speak to each other on a near monthly basis and it gives me something interesting to do when I'm broke.

Litt, Considering the number of foremengers who go to it or the foundary afterwards, I don't think there's any real opposition to it...

Actually it does acheive something, a large amount of bike anti-pathy amongst road users (particuarly taxi drivers who often end up with sidi shaped dents in their taxis)...

Change happened after the Greenham period disarmourment, decommissioning and ending of the cold war....the ladies were not responsible for this, but they did increase public awareness, which in turn changed public opinion and eventually policies....

It was a very long time ago Will, we are in a new epoch, change has happened again.

dissarmourment, and decommissioning was a direct result of the end of the cold war which was a direct result of the successful policy's that where opposed by those at the common. Namely the economic exclusion of the East, proxy wars, and the building of nukes.

why the opposition to Critical Mass on this forum?

I'm not opposed to it, i am opposed to seeing it as anything but a bit of fun.

The number of regular journeys by bike may have made Critical Mass obsolete. The original point of it, back in the '90s, was to show traffic that bikes have a right ot the road. That's pretty much established now.

you should visit copenhagen or amsterdam to see what something close to 'critical mass' is like.

it's a world away from cycling in the uk.

dissarmourment, and decommissioning was a direct result of the end of the cold war which was a direct result of the successful policy's that where opposed by those at the common. Namely the economic exclusion of the East, proxy wars, and the building of nukes.

+1

BBC Article

Excellent news ! :D

Made my day.

:D

Collapse of Soviet Union resulted from the collapse in oil prices (at least in part). Rise in cycling will, I assume result from the opposite (at least in part). CM can a be a good Friday out though.

you should visit copenhagen or amsterdam to see what something close to 'critical mass' is like.

it's a world away from cycling in the uk.
Fair point - hopefully we're on the way there though!

Wow, interesting to note that the precedent set isn't just for 'traditional' events but new ones too... So the grounds that notification of a route doesn't have to be given isn't due to traditional events not needing to do so, it's because they're random and don't have a predetermined route. This may have big implications for other protests that are meant to have been inhibited by the SOCPA. Hooray for our right to protest freely. Gawd love them Law Lords.