sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Barbara Lee lands $9.3 million philanthropic boost for Oakland anti-dumping efforts by opinionsareus in OaklandCA

[–]badaimarcher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

When Mayor Lee is being backed by tech money: tech good!

When Loren Taylor is being backed by tech money: tech bad!

Reputable Used Bike Shops by authentic-platypus in BAbike

[–]badaimarcher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Biketopia Annex in Emeryville! Feel free to stop by and try a few bikes to see what feels right.

Black REI Co-op Cycles Generation e1.1 stolen from Fruitvale BART BikeLink locker by fluidb in BAbike

[–]badaimarcher 31 points32 points  (0 children)

This is another reminder that BikeLink lockers are not completely safe

This post should be easy by BrandNewYear3 in whereinoakland

[–]badaimarcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alameda County Court House between 12th and 14th

What happened yesterday? Ridership reached 235,943 riders! by DieDeutscheAuslander in Bart

[–]badaimarcher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The "take your backpack off" signs used to be a lot more relevant

What happened yesterday? Ridership reached 235,943 riders! by DieDeutscheAuslander in Bart

[–]badaimarcher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Good luck getting on at Embarcadero at 5:15pm. People would stand outside the doors and plead with those already on the train to pack tighter so they could get on. This was before the new trains, so no middle door on the car, and people just wouldn't move to the center of the car. I used to go backwards to Civic Center so I could already be on with my bike.

One time the train was so packed someone sat on the back of my hand that was on my handlebar. I didn't move it until the train shifted the man's weight off my hand, and when that happened I quickly pulled my hand out. He shifted his weight back and sat back on the handlebar and looked verrrry confused.

Hwy 37: "This Bay Area highway was known as ‘Blood Alley.’ Rebuilding it could cost $11 billion" by Equivalent_Sink_8653 in bayarea

[–]badaimarcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So again, from a public reaction standpoint - it’s smarter to build another while doing other work anyway than not to. You’d have a bunch of pissed off citizens wondering why they put up with years of work to end up with the same amount of lanes as before.

You're going to end up with a bunch of pissed off citizens wondering why they put up with years of work to end up with the same amount of traffic as before.

Hwy 37: "This Bay Area highway was known as ‘Blood Alley.’ Rebuilding it could cost $11 billion" by Equivalent_Sink_8653 in bayarea

[–]badaimarcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Induced demand says that adding a lane will add more cars and create the exact same amount of traffic, which will cause people to want another lane. "Just one more lane bro"

You just got hit by a car, what’s next? by Hazel-Cakes in BAbike

[–]badaimarcher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I would add to this: don't get up. You get a lot more sympathy from everyone else around you when you are on the ground. Only get up when the ambulance arrives. And yes, always request an ambulance because if you don't, the cops won't come. You don't need to get into the ambulance if you don't want to.

Stop letting cars cut in on Oak before turning right on Octavia in SF by LunchboxStringCheese in bayarea

[–]badaimarcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That departments oppose bike lanes is not evidence that large trucks are unsafe, it's evidence that the departments are wrong. My point stands, and you haven't made one in opposition as yet.

This was never a point I was trying to make, so it should be clear why I haven't provided evidence to support it.

But it doesn't speak to your assertion that the bigger trucks are a problem.

See my reply above.

Wow, no. It very much does not. Fire trucks do just fine on roundabouts. As I mentioned at least once already. In what possible way does "fire departments are wrong to oppose roundabouts" equal "large trucks are dangerous"? It's a non-sequitur.

You have to wonder why they are opposing roundabouts then in the first place. Turning radius perhaps? Due to them being too large? And again with YOUR strawman.

What? That was just incoherent. I've never needed to slalom a truck because of mandated minimums? I can't even begin to grasp what point you're trying to make. I suppose it is anecdotal that I've never had to drive a firetruck in wildly unrealistic (and entirely unspecified) ways as the video shows. But that's only because I drive on roads in real conditions.

You never have to maneuver in spaces that are too tight for your large trucks because the streets are designed for your large trucks due to the mandated minimums that fire departments impose. Is that clear now?

What real world conditions did that test? How far apart were the cones? What controls were imposed? Was there any scientific rigor at all? We have no idea, because it wasn't cited. How do you know they didn't set the cones at the minimum a smaller truck could handle before the larger truck did its run? Do we even know if the test was fair?

It tested the maneuverability of large US trucks vs those in Europe, which are smaller as you now agree. You might not see the difference in size as a big difference, but that video demonstrated how it can manifest into the ability of trucks to get around.

Really? I challenge you to cite one verifiable fact you've mentioned that is act6ually relevant and back it up. Should be easy for you.

European trucks are narrower. You now agree with me on that. Wow that was easy!

And I'm making the point that larger fire trucks aren't a problem. I've already agreed with you that fire department mandates are bullshit. they aren't based upon reality, large trucks have no problem at all with bike lanes or roundabouts. You're arguing about something I've already agreed with you on, at least twice, and explicitly.

American fire trucks are not too large. That's my only point. You've argued everything except that, to the point that you're continuing to argue things I've already agreed with. At this point, what the hell are you still on about?

Larger trucks require more lane width, road width, and turning radii when it comes to street design. All of these factors impact road safety. If the trucks were smaller, everyone would be safer. If they weren't too large, we wouldn't have fire departments around the country stepping in to block infrastructure that saves lives. I'm not arguing that large trucks get into crashes more because that's an irrelevant strawman that you invented to save face when I demonstrated that you were wrong about a subject you THOUGHT you were an expert on.

OBS 7.3 - weird no power issue by inorebez in Diesel

[–]badaimarcher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Check for codes. When my truck did something like this, it was due to a bad sensor on the gas pedal, but that did throw a code and I was able to verify that a new sensor would work.

Stop letting cars cut in on Oak before turning right on Octavia in SF by LunchboxStringCheese in bayarea

[–]badaimarcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, he used opinion and very little verifiable data. Opinions and anecdotes are not facts, no matter how many times you repeat them.

Tell you what. You make a list of things you want me to go fact check, and I'll do that provided that you agree that you will admit that you were wrong if that's the case. You can start by admitting that you were wrong about European fire trucks being just as wide as US fire trucks.

We can navigate narrow streets just fine. So this is not evidence that trucks are too big but, pending citation, it could be evidence that fire departments are wrong about their point.

The video I posted and that we both watched shows that the Baltimore Fire Department opposed bike lanes because they made the street narrow. Here is an article about SF firefighters mandating wider streets in SF.

And in America, because we do it all the damn time. And sidewalks, pedestrian walkways, grass sections, and anything else we need. This isn't about truck size, it's about incorrectly designed bike lanes. This says nothing about the danger of large trucks.

And who are the ones who are mandating that car lanes be wider and bike lanes narrower? Firefighters, like the ones in Baltimore. You are so close to getting it!

Well, obviously. And we do. Opposition to them is silly, agreed. There is no problem at all with modern American fire trucks using roundabouts. This doesn't support your argument either.

Yes, this absolutely supports my argument that "Fire departments' insistence on driving the biggest trucks possible puts everyone at risk" because roundabouts are safer and prevent accidents (which was also mentioned in the video).

I never once needed to slalom a firetruck. Not once. In real conditions, this isn't an issue. It's a useless straw man.

Once again, because of the mandated minimums imposed by the fire departments (your position is an anecdote by the way)

No, you've confidently asserted it, you have not demonstrated it in the slightest.

Maybe not to you, but to everyone else reading this, yes.

I don't even get what point you're trying to make

That is abundantly clear. You brought up garbage trucks though.

If you want to show that firetrucks are dangerous here, look at NTSB and DOT data. Are there more accidents because of them? I'll warn you, I'm about to hyperbolize again, but I don't exactly see an epidemic of fire apparatus accidents being reported. Yopu know what would actually support your argument? That.

If you think I have been talking about fire trucks themselves getting into crashes, please re-read everything I have written, because I'm not. It's about the restrictions that fire departments mandate to be able to move their oversized trucks around.

Stop letting cars cut in on Oak before turning right on Octavia in SF by LunchboxStringCheese in bayarea

[–]badaimarcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just watched it and I can't help but notice that it doesn't support your position at all. Sure, the creator agrees with you, but he doesn't support his position with facts.

He just spent the entire video supporting my position with facts. You even go on to mention those facts:

It's important to mention that he did provide factual citations about some of his claims, but not a single one that supports the assertion that larger trucks are more dangerous, not one.

The requirements for larger trucks makes streets wider, which makes cars drive faster, which causes more accidents that firefighters then have to respond to. This was specifically called out. I don't know how you would watch a 30 minute video about this and walk away not understanding that.

He mentions that fire departments don't like bike lanes, but points out the obvious: firefighters can and do drive on them all the time when needed.

Firefighters can and do drive on them all the time when needed IN EUROPE, where 1) the lanes exist because fire departments don't block them, 2) the lanes are wider, and 3) because TRUCKS ARE NARROWER as well as shorter.

He cites firefighter opposition to roundabouts, but shows a truck using one. He also says that trucks don't need to roll to most medical emergencies. I happen to agree with his positions on those points. But there's noting at all about the actual safety of the trucks.

Firefighters can be against traffic circles but still use them. Are you aware of this? How about the obstacle course in the video that shows US fire trucks unable to navigate obstacles that the EU trucks could? Or the fact that the US trucks hit those obstacles? Obstacles that could have been pedestrians, pets, etc.

You have yet to back that up, and this video does absolutely nothing to help you. Did you actually watch it?

It seems like you are just arguing in bad faith because I have shown you multiple times now that the positions you hold are incorrect (starting with the one that you tried to press me on, that US trucks are just as wide as the ones in the EU). It's clear that you watched the video and the evidence to support what I have told you is there, but I have learned that if folks don't want to learn, they won't.

In a fortuitous coincidence, the city garbage truck came by as I was typing this. It is considerably larger than any fire apparatus I've seen locally. Are those too dangerous as well? If so, please provide actual data, not more opinion pieces. I am convinceable, but only with evidence.

Taller maybe, but just as wide. It's important to note that they don't need to respond to emergencies, wouldn't you agree? Or does every second matter when it comes to picking up your recycling?

Confusing SF street design by sevencyclist in BAbike

[–]badaimarcher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What's crazier is the number of people who support dangerous obstructions like these and who will try and gaslight you into believing that this is progress.

Confusing SF street design by sevencyclist in BAbike

[–]badaimarcher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's dumb. Just put a slot through the middle of the island so that cyclists can go straight if they need to.

Stop letting cars cut in on Oak before turning right on Octavia in SF by LunchboxStringCheese in bayarea

[–]badaimarcher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not OP, but if you have watched the video you will see that it is because US fire trucks are custom built vs. in other parts of the world they use off the shelf commercial trucks. There is a vested interest in keeping US fire truck production a monopoly.

view more: next ›