This was a Critical Mass event, which is why the bicyclists are taking up all of the street as a way to reclaim the streets and protest the lack of safety for riders under usual conditions. It’s not legal, but protests are never useful if they’re fully legal now, are they.
And ignoring a lot of traffic laws?
It’s a protest. Showing how dangerous the streets are to cyclists (and how many cyclists use the roads) is the message. A protest that challenges law and inconveniences people peacefully is how they garner attention (hopefully as a prelude to change and improvements).
So yeah, ignoring a lot of traffic laws.
Thank you. It was an honest question, downvotes are fuckin hilarious lol
I apologize as someone who fully thought you knew it was a protest and were just being a snarky ass opposed to their cause and sent you a down vote.
Never heard of the movement but as a cyclist the first thing i thought was no helmets, ignoring stop lights and riding outside the lane. Now that i know it’s a protest I guess i understand.
This is critical mass and each city does theirs a bit differently.
They are a form of protest but they’re usually done legally with the cooperation of police. The lead riders will stop at Red lights, but the mass of cyclists is treated as a single, long vehicle, and will continue through red intersections if the light was green when the front of the group went through. In my state at least, helmets are only required for children.
The official ride does not ride on the wrong side of the road, but there are usually some free spirits doing what they want.
They also have volunteer ride leaders, medics, and corkers who stand in front of cars trying to pass perpendicularly through the long bike “vehicle”.
Traffic laws have been written by automobile club themselves. For vroomers by vroomers.