Active Transportation Alliance detractors and supporters- be heard

I've seen disparaging comments about ATA but never any elaboration, just name calling. I'm just curious to know why they're being knocked.

I also didn't see much buzz if any at these forums for Bike the Drive. Instead, again, just dismissive comments. I'd like to have an informed opinion here: are people just blowing smoke or is there fire there somewhere?

Views: 2535

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gene Tenner on May 29, 2015 at 4:21am

For two years in a row I ordered t-shirts with my Bike the Drive packet. Two years in a row the t-shirts did not come with my packet, so I called and asked for them to be sent to me, or I would pick them up. Both times someone said I would get a call back (you would think they would handle the problem right then and there) and no one ever returned my call.

I love their advocacy for cyclists, but their customer service is in the toilet.

Permalink Reply by sten on May 29, 2015 at 4:36am

ATA sponsors events where they bring cops out to corners like Kinzie and Clinton to make cyclists "aware" that we need to stop for stop signs. This actually plays out as inviting cops to spend a day or two screaming at and harassing cyclists, whether we stop or not. After a couple encounters over the last couple years, I stopped and explained to the ATA folks that I didn't want my money being spent so that I could get harassed by cops. Nothing changed, so I stopped donating.

Permalink Reply by V W on May 29, 2015 at 5:34am
Yeah I'd say that's a valid criticism. I have seen those come to think of it but didn't connect it to ATA. That should be a much lower item on their priority list.
Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on May 29, 2015 at 7:42am

This, and their continued and persistent insistence that magic talismans be the main safety focus for bicycling, is why I don't support or belong to ATA any longer.  They are also weak/neutral (if not sometimes downright anti with some of their folks) regarding Idaho Stop ever being implemented. 

Never again.  


They do not have MY best interests at heart. 

Permalink Reply by Irvin Steinert on May 30, 2015 at 1:28pm

You want Idaho Stop? Then, you will pretty much have to move to Idaho. Personally, I'm happy to let it stay there.

Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on May 30, 2015 at 3:13pm

I agree.

The only ones that would know about the Idaho Stop law would be bicyclists.  Any car drivers who saw bicyclists following this new law would continue to complain, and complain more frequently.

It doesn't benefit bicyclists to ask for any special treatment.  And I don't think the ATA should be advocates for it.  They needn't oppose it - they can just remain silent. 

Permalink Reply by Irvin Steinert on May 31, 2015 at 3:25am

Yes! Also, what happens upon "bicycle rush hour"? With multiple cyclists converging on the same intersection from multiple directions? [BTW: I'm pretty sure a "bicycle rush hour" has never happened in Idaho.] I believe the result would be bike on bike accidents and fist fights (bike on bike crime!).

Permalink Reply by Irvin Steinert on May 31, 2015 at 10:14am

exactly!

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on May 31, 2015 at 9:42am
You pretty much have shown to everyone who reads this that you have zero comprehension of what Idaho Stop is, or how it works, by even asking this absurd question.
Permalink Reply by Irvin Steinert on May 31, 2015 at 10:14am

The Idaho stop is the common name for a law that allows cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign.

You're statement is absurd.

This is the USA. Street laws are always stretched in actual use. I can see it now: "Dude, Idaho Stop!" will be the excuse for all to do what ever they want without concern for others.

In a city like Chicago, it's a disaster waiting to happen.

There is no reason of why it should be implemented except for it decreases the time of the commute and reduces the effort of the cyclist. I find that no reason to abandon safety of the cyclist or ruining the lives of the little old ladies that end up running them over.

But all arguments are irrelevant IT WILL NEVER BE IMPLEMENTED HERE!

BTW: it was a rhetorical question.

Permalink Reply by Tandemonium on May 29, 2015 at 8:48am

Plenty of valid criticism on this thread, but, "somebody makes me stop at one red light one time per year" is not one of them.

Permalink Reply by Maurice on May 29, 2015 at 9:35am

If they have that kind of access to CPD, there are much better ways of leveraging it.  How about getting them to clear out chronically car-filled bike lanes, for example?

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service