ADHD In The Urban Cycling Community?

Background Reading

Summary

It all began when a friend of Bobby Cann decided to post an additional thread on the ChainLink:

Bobby Cann Killed by Ryne San Hamel
Posted by Simone Bogode on June 1, 2013 at 11:04pm

Hey everyone. The man who Killed Bobby Cann has an extremely good and well paid layer. The facts coming out are that his BAC was .127 (roughly 6 drinks in an hour) and that he was driving 50 in a 30 when he hit Bobby. There were three other people in the car with him and no one stopped him from driving. I am also hearing that they were disrespectful and unremorseful on the seen. These are not good people and I would really like to see justice served.
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130601/old-town/100k-bond-for-man-…

  • I am posting this because keeping media attention on this is prob the best way to make sure that these people do not get off easy.
  • I am asking for people to come out and talk about this. To show up at the court hearings and to over all not let this get swept under the rug.
  • I am asking for people in the community that can help with the to please get a hold of me.

Thanks!

Am impassioned plea from someone who knew the victim and wants to do ‘something‘.

Reply by Juan 2-8 mi. 8 hours ago
Disrespectful and unremorseful on the scene... 🙁

This is how ugly rumors get started and passed on as fact by those who hear and believe…

Reply by Jordan Snow 3 hours ago
From where did you hear that they were disrespectful at the scene? I can’t imagine that being the case, but you can never be quite sure how callous people are.

A very good question to be asked. It does seem incredible to me at least that in such a situation I could be callous. But when you are drunk enough all sorts of behaviors emerge. It is one of the reasons that I always ask myself why cyclists allow themselves to get drunk enough to not be able to find their bikes after a gathering? Do they actually ride home in this sort of condition on a routine basis? At least once a cyclist has actually asked for assistance of the ChainLink Crowd from those who were out drinking to help him find his bike. He actually forgot where he had ‘parked‘ it. Knowing what alcohol can do to a motorist, why on earth would any cyclist attempt to repeat that same mistake?

Reply by Nick 2 hours ago
I’m more interested in the issue regarding public bike lanes. I think Bobby Cann would want our focus to be there, not on Ryne.
Also- about his being disrespectful and unremorseful on the scene, I’m hearing quite the opposite. That Ryne attempted CPR until being forced away by a registered nurse who pulled over and helped. Ryne was witnessed scooping blood from Cann’s mouth attempting to clear airways and telling him to hang in there etc. Can you imagine?!
Since this accident there have been 5-6 deaths from cyclist/car accidents in the Chicago area alone!! I myself have been hit by a door while biking on Lincoln Ave. When is the city going to take this epidemic seriously? Especially around areas where drinking and driving happens the most, Wrigley Field, United Center etc…The fact that bikers are forced to fend for themselves really makes me mad.

This is where the ‘wheels start coming off‘ this conversation (at least for me):

  • Every Lane Is A Bike Lane © Wheel and Sprocket

    Every Lane Is A Bike Lane
    © Wheel and Sprocket

    One really does not get ‘hit by a door’. Not unless of course one was tossed or otherwise impelled through the air at your person. You can of course run into a door if you are riding in the ‘Door Zone‘ which is of course really two problems:

    • If the lane is wide enough to allow you to ride to the left of the ‘Door Zone‘ and you do not, then for my money the problem is one of your own creation.
    • If the bike lane is positioned too close to the parking lane and that lane is not wide enough to allow you to comfortably ride outside the ‘Door Zone’ you share at least 50% of the burden with the municipality that created this lane. I say 50% because no matter the existence of a bike lane you can and should opt to use whatever lane you desire to find safety.
  • Relating some contradictory information to the alleged disrespect being shown to the victim of this accident is a great thing. I find drunken driving even more an ‘accident‘ than anything that an enraged driver is likely to do. I say this merely because a drunk is about as logical in his actions as a person who is high on LSD. The brain has essentially been turned off. In fact that is largely the reason people drink in the first instance, to numb themselves. It is before the drinking begins that the driver is clearly guilty of the ‘accident‘. Unless you were drinking a spiked soda not knowing what was occurring anyone who drinks and either drives or operates a bicycle is acting in a willfully negligent manner.
  • Bike Lanes‘ is probably not the issue for me in this instance. A drunken driver or cyclist who fails to exercise judgment when making turns or otherwise engaging with another vehicle in the intersection is equally likely to cause a collision that results in death. In fact it is at the intersections where most accidents occur. This has always been the case regardless of ones views on ‘bike lanes‘. If you want to remove the possibility of this kind of accident then ‘bike trails‘ or whatever you wish to call them (where there is no interaction between vehicles) is the way to go.
  • Some bicycle advocates are really uninformed. Whether or not a street has a protected bike lane (PBL) or not depends on several factors:
    • Street width is the single most important factor. You simply have to have enough room (i.e. width) on a street to install a PBL otherwise you may actually have to make some critical decisions. These might include:
      • Removal of existing parking on one or both sides of the street
      • Getting buy-in from local small business shop owners who might not wish to see their drive-up traffic drop (this is especially important if you run a business like a coffee shop that does “rush hour” business but you “have no drive-through“.
    • Whether the street is bi-directional. One of the weaknesses of the Dearborn Street PBL is that they attempted to cram in a bi-directional bicycle traffic lane on a street that supports only one-way auto traffic. This means having to install special traffic signals to control the turn rates of both the automobile and bicycle traffic separately. This is costly and no every municipality can afford that kind of expense. But in making the Dearborn’s PBL bi-directional it means having both drivers and cyclists in the same “Door Zone” simultaneously. Cyclists attempting to avoid bike-vs.pedestrian collisions may cause a bike-vs.-bike on instead.

It would appear that Nick did not have the courage of his stated convictions. By the time I went back to review this thread his comments were gone. But some did reply to his remarks:

Reply by Zoetrope 12 hours ago
Agreed.

Still, there’s no reason we can’t do both and show up to the court date in July, as well as push for the construction of protected bike lane’s in the city.

Nick said:

I’m more interested in the issue regarding public bike lanes.  I think Bobby Cann would want our focus to be there, not on Ryne.

The ChainLink crowd has a powerful way of creating fear in the hearts of folks who do not wish to be ex-communicated from the group. For this reason people who have ideas that deviate from the accepted blathering of the group often find it necessary to amend or even delete the things that really wanted to say.

Reply by Jeff Schneider 12 hours ago
In this case, it appears that a person was killed by a drunk driver. Blaming his death on lack of cycle lanes conveniently takes the responsibility away from the perpetrator.
I really want better cycling infrastructure. I think that it would help cyclists and drivers to coexist safely. But no matter how good the infrastructure, a drunk driver would still be a danger to everyone – other drivers, pedestrians and cyclists.
As for whether or not the driver showed concern or remorse, I really don’t care. If he killed someone because he was drunk, then he needs to go to jail (preferably for a very long time). Being sorry doesn’t make it all better (unless you are two years old…).

This comment provides a “teachable moment“:

  • We are never going to have 100% coverage of bicycle infrastructure like PBLs. Cost and size (i.e. width) limitations simply make this impossible.
  • But cyclists and motorists still need to know how to “share the road“. For that you need training. Vehicular Cycling is exactly the kind of training that should be brought to bear on the problem.

Reply by Simone Bogode 12 hours ago
I agree. Both issues are important. I heard they were disrespectful on the scene from of friend of mine and bobby’s that spoke with the arresting officer. I also talked to Marcus from Yojimbo’s who was one of the first people on the scene and he made no mention of the driver trying to help Bobby. In any case this guy must have had 6 drinks in an hour and was driving over 50 in a 30. I am not trying to be disrespectful or draw attention away from other issues but this man killed my friend.
I have contacted the Mayor’s office and asked them to make a statement about bike safety in the city. I have also contacted IDOT ( where Bobby was hit is under their jurisdiction for some odd reason) and it looks like they are going to be putting a protected bike lane in now.
Awareness and bike safety in this city are important issues and need to be addressed. I urge you Nick to also contact the Mayors office and IDOT on these topics.

#RollTogether

#RollTogether

Simone has made the classic mistake of using an absence of information to prove a negative. I have done it myself so understand the likelihood that one can simply fall into an easy assumption that fits your presumptions about a situation. But frankly we have all too much of this going on between these two communities of roadway users to last a lifetime. It is high time that some of the blather that People for Bikes is fond of posting be taken seriously by Urban Cyclists.

Reply by Alex 12 hours ago
Ummm, who are the half dozen cyclists who’ve been killed since this past Wednesday and where did these deaths happen?

Nick said:
Of course they are. They don’t want the focus on the real issue, the bike lanes. The more I read up about this, the whole story is just so sad. And what’s worse is that people are going to spend all the time blaming this kid Ryne when meanwhile a half dozen other bikers have since died from being struck by a car.

The more I think about it the more I am likely to assume that Nick was as “drunk as a skunk” when he dashed off that rather silly and wildly illogical missive that he had (now that sobriety has returned) dashed off in a moment of “high dudgeon“. No problems. Again a teachable moment presents itself.

Cyclists Like Motorists Are Firmly In The Drinking Camp

Cyclists are as likely to publish photographs of themselves hoisting a few drinks and then giving the camera the finger or mooning the photographer as are motorists. I have seen all of these sorts of things on both the ChainLink Forum as well as the Elmhurst Bicycle Club discussion board. People think nothing of the implications of their behavior until something turns ugly. But the time to consider what and how these actions mean to our ability to pilot our vehicles is now while we are sober and able to read this or any other written matter without falling down and peeing ourselves.

And if indeed the notion is correct that we both drive cars and bikes then we are probably doubly likely to be a danger on the roadway.

Reply by Juan Primo 12 hours ago
I disagree, Nick. It’s not the City’s fault that drunks are killing people any more than it’s the City’s fault that hundreds of people are shooting and killing each other. If it were the City’s responsibility they they would outlaw liquor (been there) and outlaw guns (done that).

Reply by Jeff Schneider 12 hours ago
Holding someone responsible for committing a crime is not “blaming”. We are all responsible for our actions.

Nick said:
Yes and blaming Ryne, like this guy and his petition is conveniently taking the blame off the city. Are you going to sit there and say these things about ‘he needs to go to jail for a very long time’ as if you have never had drinks and driven a car? Or been in a car when the driver has been drinking? Be honest before you start throwing stones.

Reply by Juan Primo 11 hours ago
If we’re saying that 28 years old is a kid, then we have taken extended adolescence way too far. At age 28, the driver knew what he was doing. With a blood alcohol level of .127, Ryne San Hamel was absolutely polluted. He was trashed at 6:35 pm, before some of us even had dinner.
And if some posters can say “Bobby Cann would have” wanted this or done that, then I can say Ryne San Hamel knew how drunk he was and knew how dangerous he was behind the wheel.

Juan Primo has a point. At the tender age of 28 years one would think that indeed a person is no longer an adolescent. That however makes me ask the rather indelicate question “Why then do 28 year old men and women wish to ride around “naked” to express their outrage over oil usage? And then into the bargain get upset when news outlets announce their intentions to do so? And then these same 28 year olds decide that since people will be showing up to gawk at their naked bodies that they now need “security teams“? That whole scenario makes me think that the Word Naked Bike Ride was dreamt up over the same kinds of libations that our erstwhile driver was consuming when he hit and killed Bobby Cann. Haven’t we all had quite enough of the effects of too much alcohol in our lives?

Reply by Zoetrope 11 hours ago
A witch hunt isn’t going to do anything for anyone, but if we can help out by showing up to court one day in order that this doesn’t get swept under the rug like so many other cycling tragedies, then I’d love to be there. I think it would make a lot more sense for us all to push for PBL’s and use this as an opportunity to become more active in the community than it does to get cynical about the situation or narrowly focus on Ryne.

It would appear that Zoetrope has decided to avoid her usual snarkiness and aim for a more level-headed assessment of the issues.

Reply by notoriousDUG 10 hours ago
Are you retarded? If he had not had a .127 BAC there probably would not have been an accident because he would have not been doing 20 over the speed limit. Drunk driving is a far larger danger to cyclists than a lack of infrastructure. The dude got wasted and killed a person, why should he not be in jail for a long time?
Also, I have driven a car drunk, I did it when I was much younger than the driver in this incident and I will never do it again. I also will not get into a car with a drunk driver and I will make great efforts to prevent an drunk from driving. I can, and will, throw that stone.

Nick said:
Yes and blaming Ryne, like this guy and his petition is conveniently taking the blame off the city. Are you going to sit there and say these things about ‘he needs to go to jail for a very long time’ as if you have never had drinks and driven a car? Or been in a car when the driver has been drinking? Be honest before you start throwing stones.

As usual notoriousDUG arrives a bit late to the discussion and strikes a bit of an over-the-top tone just when folks were starting to “settle in“.

Reply by Duppie 13.5185km 2 hours ago
Let’s see.
“Nick” joined right before he started commenting on one thread only, trying to change the subject to bike lanes instead of the driver and pulling facts out of his you-know-where. (5-6 cyclist related deaths since Bobby Cann’s death)
I think you’re right, MMM

MagMileMarauder said:
“Nick” = Perp’s lawyer or friend. The name “Ryno” was used by his buddies on his Myspace page.

Now the full scale assault on the interloper has begun.

Reply by Mark 1 hour ago
All the bike lanes in the world won’t protect cyclists from drivers like Ryne. Don’t weasel out and blame the City. Ryne must face the consequences of not driving responsibly.

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 1 hour ago
Stop using this incident as fuel for the bike lane agenda. Protected bike lanes would not have stopped Mr. Hamel from driving drunk, and would have not protected Bobby from the car. The real issue here is preventing reckless driving. Bike lanes are irrelevant in this situation.

Reply by Scotto 6.8 1 hour ago
Sucks that he has now “polluted” this discussion of cyclists.

MagMileMarauder said:
“Nick” = Perp’s lawyer or friend. The name “Ryno” was used by his buddies on his Myspace page.

Okay. We have probably reached the point where more heat than light is being emitted. Time to shut down this commentary on just how far afield ChainLink Forum conversations can roam.

I Underestimated the Blather Level Of This Group

Here is more of the stuff that really begins to come in chaotic meaningless bursts. Eventually the young lady who started this thread asked that it be “shut down“. Good for her. But before that happens let me memorialize a bit more of the carnage:

Reply by Zoetrope 5 hours ago
Depends on what kind of PBL. Plastic bollards wouldn’t do much here or anywhere else to protect a cyclist from a crash, but if the lane is buffered with a concrete wall type of thing it would.

Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) said:
Stop using this incident as fuel for the bike lane agenda. Protected bike lanes would not have stopped Mr. Hamel from driving drunk, and would have not protected Bobby from the car. The real issue here is preventing reckless driving. Bike lanes are irrelevant in this situation.

A concrete wall would be horrid looking! If you think that cleaning up on Dearborn Street’s PBL after a snowfall is difficult, imagine what happens when a concrete wall seals off all the ice and snow to keep it in the lane. Image too how every difficult it would be for motorists returning to their vehicles to get into the driver’s side door. How much thought do you suppose Zoetrope gave to all of this before opening her mouth? Very little I would presume. Please people before you start blathering about this or that bit of Social Engineering that you want to see made permanent give it some thought.

Reply by Davo 4 hours ago
I suggest that we go to the facebook page and demand that his company issue a statement about what they intend to do for this “human” they employ. Perhaps if someone works with anonymous, they could do something as well. Seems like a site who promotes drinking should share responsibility of actions of their employees.

Reply by Davo 4 hours ago
Also I see in the report that this “person” refused to a breathalyzer test at the crash and failed a field sobriety test. When did they get his BAC? This makes me think that it was waaay higher than that if it was taken at a hospital or police station. Does anyone know how/where they would have gotten his BAC?

There is a very mean streak of vigilantism that runs through this group. It is almost as if they assume that motorists are targeting them. Nothing could be further from the truth unless you will also agree that pedestrians have the right to make this assumption whenever one of them is killed by a cyclist in San Francisco coming down a steep hill on a fixed gear bike with no brakes. Fair is fair!

Reply by Cameron 7.5 mi 4 hours ago
Exactly, there’s only so much that road design can do to mitigate stupid users. When you have people going 50 mph down Clybourn there really isn’t a design that can make it safe. That level of idiot proofing just isn’t possible. To make all roads safer we need to target removing people with San Hamel’s level of stupid, self centered, recklessness from the drivers seat. Unfortunately it’s rarely themselves that they hurt.

Reply by David Barish 4 hours ago
I think Adam is absolutely correct. From what we have heard it appears the driver’s behavior would have put any rider, pedestrian or other driver in danger regardless of the lane. This is NOT about PBL or any other such issue. This is about very bad driving behavior taking somebody’s life. Laws have long attempted to protect people from this type of behavior. Reckless driving and driving while intoxicated have long been illegal. That was not enough to stop this driver. So sad.

Now comes a bit of a pissing match. One always has to ask whether Zoetrope is engaged in a meaningful conversation or just having a little “internet fun“:

Reply by Zoetrope 4 hours ago
Can we please stop using this tragedy as an opportunity to push the anti-PBL agenda. You are tarnishing the internet and giving us all a bad name. Thanks and god bless.

Reply by Zoetrope 4 hours ago
How are they not relevant to any situation in which a cyclist is killed by reckless motorist behavior? Situations like these can be avoided with the proper PBL. If you were pro-PBL’s you’d be pro cyclist safety, and that’s what PBL’s do: keep riders safe. Anti-PBL Agenda Haters go away.

Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) said:
I am pro-PBLs. My point was that they are irrelevant in this situation, and the real issue is reckless driving.

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 3 hours ago
Protected bike lanes will not stop drunk drivers.

Reply by Zoetrope 3 hours ago
Thanks for pointing out the relative futility of trying to eliminate drunk driving. Aside from fitting bar goers with electronic collars that constrict the wearers airway when it senses you are unfit to drive, what do you suggest we do? I don’t really want to hear your inane solution, I’m making fun of you.
Regardless, whether the driver was drunk or sober, a barrier is the only thing that will protect a cyclist from a similar fate.

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 3 hours ago
Equip all cars with breathalyzers that prevent the car from starting if the BAC is over the legal limit.

Well I guess that Zoetrope has answered our question. This is just another instance of “internet fun“. Does anyone still think that conversing with her is worthwhile? I certainly would not waste my precious time with someone like this.

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
I will tell you that I know with absolute certainty from a first-hand witness how completely decimated & heartbroken Ryne was at the scene. He did everything he could to assist the nurse in aiding Bobby and waited with him until medics arrived. He was fully cooperative with police at the scene; submitted willingly to a field sobriety test and provided the names of the bars at which he drank prior to the accident.
He is a normal, 28 year old guy who drank too much on one of the first beautiful summer days we had this season and made the extremely unfortunate choice to drive after doing so.
I’m assuming every one of you posting on here has never driven drunk, gotten into a car with someone who had been drinking, or stayed silent when someone you were fully aware was drunk left to drive. It goes without saying how incredibly hypocritical if not malicious casting that kind of judgment would be.
Similarly, propagating vicious, completely manufactured gossip such as claiming Ryne wasn’t remorseful or that he was disrespectful is despicable. Ryne was absolutely devastated. I am sure he is struggling with every fiber of his being to find the will to survive or feeling that he deserves to right now. It’s disgusting that any one of you would ever suggest or believe otherwise.
Simone, what is your objective in disseminating that despicable lie? Did you hope to create more drama? Create more pain in a nightmare situation? You’re calling for people to show up at these court hearings to punish him more than he will be already? What exactly are you hoping for, would you be satisfied if Ryne committed suicide? Would that level the playing field you?
Ryne is not a murderer. He did not wake up that morning determined to go kill someone. He made an extremely poor choice to drive drunk—a choice every last one of you has made personally or witnessed. Don’t doubt for a second that his life won’t be absolute hell for the next decade. And yes, at least he has a life—but does ruining his accomplish anything at all in the way of honoring Bobby’s?
I sincerely hope the rest of you reading and posting in this forum have a more evolved sense of justice than Simone.

chicagoBikes is evidently unaware of the nature of this forum. It is more angry and sadistic than anything you might have conjured up while reading “Lord of the Flies“. The word cesspool comes to mind more often than not. And to think that a person like Gabe could call the South and West sides of the city “shitholes“. Maybe is a more apt description of this forum?

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 3 hours ago
There are absolutely ZERO excuses for his actions. Stop defending him. While you’re at it, tell him to stop sending his goonies over to defend him as well. I don’t give a sh*t if he is sorry or remorseful. He should be – he just took another human’s life though his incredibly irresponsible actions. He deserves everything that is coming to him. Maybe he should have had these thoughts before he chose to get drunk and go for a joy ride.

Once the ChainLink Rabble have decided that you are no longer human you cannot reason with any of them. Tell further illustrate my point search the ChainLink Forum to find any discussion of the nature of the cyclists who mowed down an Asian pedestrian in California while riding his brakes less fixed gear bike. I challenge you to discover any level of vitriol approaching what you have read here so far.

Reply by David Barish 3 hours ago
Gauntlet thrown. Fun made.
Lets put all cyclists in protected lanes with suits of armor. That Iron Man outfit may get a little hot. Just saying. This is about a drunk driver. Put that same guy on Dearborn and the result is just as bad if not worse. Put up a concrete barrier? Nice reality check. Lets put a fence on the Arizona border while we are at it.
And I still agree with Adam. I still mildly support PBLs. Is just that this sad incident is not about a PBL.

Zoetrope said:
Thanks for pointing out the relative futility of trying to eliminate drunk driving. Aside from fitting bar goers with electronic collars that constrict the wearers airway when it senses you are unfit to drive, what do you suggest we do? I don’t really want to hear your inane solution, I’m making fun of you.

Reply by Duppie 13.5185km 3 hours ago
Well, look at that…
Another pro-Ryne troll. Joined 35 minutes ago. First post.
Hello “Nick”! Did you have a quick sex-change operation this morning?

Literally “hitting below the belt“. How very predictable.

Reply by Jeff Schneider 3 hours ago
As for eliminating drunk driving, I don’t think that it’s possible to “eliminate” any behavior. However, the one inane solution that has been shown empirically to reduce drunk driving fatalities is tougher penalties.
I’m sure there are many situations where a PBL could protect cyclists from minor distracted/impaired driving errors. That’s one reason I like PBLs. But someone who is completely wasted and driving very fast is a threat in a different league.

Reply by Active Transportation Alliance 3 hours ago
Hey everyone, our Crash Support staffer, Jason Jenkins asked me to post this (he’s in the field today).
Active Trans (Jason) is coordinating with the 18th police district and is trying to help them in securing volunteer court advocates for this case so their office doesn’t get overwhelmed. We will keep everyone updated here and through our social media.
Please email jason @ activetrans dot org with any questions.
Thanks,
Ethan Spotts, Active Trans

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
I am absolutely NOT defending his actions. But I am defending him.
He is not a bad person, he is not a murderer. There is no reason to villainize him, individually; though I’m sure they’ll make a prime example of him, he’ll bear the punishment for a crime that is probably one of the most ubiquitous of all.
This is turning into a Salem witch hunt–would you be satisfied if they strung him up & burned him at the stake? We’ve evolved since then, we don’t do that anymore–catch up to the rest of us.

At moments like this I always frame a picture in my mind of the French peasants standing in front of the guillotine during those famous days of execution. They are shouting all manner of horrible things and cheering as the heads roll. I just wonder why then are these same people so very incensed when the Mayor of the city cracks down on scofflaw behavior or at least threatens to?

Reply by Zoetrope 3 hours ago
Arizona… that’s a bit of a curve-ball but still in the realm of stupidity I was expecting. Seriously though, David, with all due respect, it appears as if you’ll agree with anyone that isn’t me (or anyone whom you haven’t disagreed with/been offended by in the past).

David Barish said:
Lets put a fence on the Arizona border while we are at it.
And I still agree with Adam.

One gets the impression that Zoetrope while lacking “people skills” is also unemployed. No person who collects a paycheck each week can possibly justify being on the forum discussion as often or as long as he/she is.

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 3 hours ago
Of course he didn’t decide to kill someone. That’s why he is not being charged with murder. There are, however, plenty of reasons to vilify him. He is NOT the victim here. He made the choice to get drunk and go for a drive and he will pay for his actions.

chicagoBikes said:
I am absolutely NOT defending his actions. But I am defending him.

Maybe the very best thing to do is outlaw drinking altogether in the city and then getting either behind the wheel of a motor vehicle or the handlebar of a bicycle. Fair is fair! But you and I know that such an idea would be met with such resistance from the Urban Cycling Community that it would make the Occupy Wall Street and G8 demonstrations look like the World Naked Bike Ride.

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
The site does not promote drinking. It serves as a directory for bars & restaurants –like metromix or yelp. You apparently haven’t even visited the site. Ignorant.

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 3 hours ago
Promoting bars is indirectly promoting drinking. Regardless, it seems like you are missing the big picture here.

Adam you stepped right into that swing just now. If “promoting bars is indirectly promoting drinking” then what in heaven’s name is anyone on the ChainLink Forum doing joining entire groups created precisely for the purpose of promoting drinking? Ok, this is really getting silly.

Reply by Duppie 13.5185km 3 hours ago
I can tell that Ms. ChicagoBikes is going to be longlasting contributor to the Chainlink. She does all the right things: Pulls stuff out of her you-know where. Immediately launches into personal attacks, and generally ticks people off.
Welcome aboard, princess! looking forward to more entertaining brainfarts from you!

Yikes!

Reply by David Barish 3 hours ago
there is something to be said for your comment that we cannot draw conclusions as to the driver’s soul or what kind of person he is. However, Adam’s statement that there is still no excuse at all for the act, rings just as true. Lets assume for the purpose of this discussion that what you say is true. Lets assume the driver is a fundamentally good person. His bad act still took a life. If anything it MUST be a beacon to us all that a single stupid act can still be lethal. A single night of bad behavior can still be lethal. It does not matter who you were before, you still took a life. Think before you get in a car drunk. Think before you get on a bike drunk. Think before you get sidetracked by (whatever). Think before you kill somebody. We seem to be too wrapped up in our own lives to pay attention to the world around us. We need to be empathetic BEFORE we make the life changing bad decision. Putting the best spin on the driver, I still see a self absorbed [insert descriptive expletive here] who suffered the buzz kill of driving into an innocent person. It goes down hill from there.
But, that being said, I don’t condemn the guy to hell. He is young enough that the life he has (and Bobby does not) can be used to do some good in the world.

chicagoBikes said:
I am absolutely NOT defending his actions. But I am defending him.

So is everyone on board with the notion that whatever happens to the driver who killed Bobby Cann should be duplicated on the bicyclists who mowed down the pedestrian in California?

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
I assure you I am very much a female and not “Nick,” a pro-Ryne troll. I’ve been following this story since it happened, as I mentioned–I’m close to a first-hand witness of the accident. I joined because I am horrified at how vindictive you all are being.
This isn’t Syria guys.

First of all chicagoBikes I think you owe an apology to the Syrians. Chicago’s ChainLink Forum is far worse than Nazi Germany in many respects. Syria is just a “walk in the park” by comparison. All you would need to do to understand just how bad this place really is, would be to substitute the word Jew for the name of the driver who killed Bobby Cann and then read all the lines in your best Hitler imitation.

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
Absolutely no one is suggesting letting him off with a warning. Hyperbolic arguments are fallacious

Reply by Kevin C 3 hours ago
“Close to a first-hand witness” because you were in the car, Claire, or because of your business relationship with Ryne in Aquatic Innovations?

Reply by Christine (5.0) 3 hours ago
If I’m twirling around a loaded handgun, it goes off, and I kill someone, then I am a murderer.
It may not have been premeditated in that he didn’t set out to specifically kill Bobby, but it was premeditated in that he performed an action that everyone knows can inflict death. What’s more, it’s not like he hit a rare pedestrian while going around a bend in a sparsely populated country area while coming home from the saloon (monstrous, but at least the narrative makes some sense). We are in fucking Chicago. There’s plenty of other transit options that allow a person to not become a murdering shitbag.
Also, I don’t know what kind of world you live in, but I don’t know anyone who drives drunk. Not because I’m friends with only cyclists (alas, cyclists make up a very small portion of my social circle) but because I apparently don’t spend much time around assholes. “A crime that is probably one of the most ubiquitous of all”? Da fuk? I’m pretty sure that would be jaywalking, or torrenting movies. Right thinking people know to designate a DD, call a significant other to pick them up, or take a cab/public transit.

I would ask the same thing of cyclists that I ask of drivers. Why on earth would you get behind the wheel or the handlebar of a bicycle when you are unable to control it effectively?

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
I absolutely agree — it should beacon us all to be more aware, make better choices, be more responsible.
A self-absorbed $*#$ who suffered a buzzkill? Jesus. Taking someone’s life as a buzzkill? That’s about the harshest condemnation of a person’s soul as I can imagine. …kind of an odd schizophrenic departure you had there, from the first half of your response.

Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) 3 hours ago
Drunk driving isn’t an accident. It’s entirely preventable though responsible actions. THAT is why we are vilifying Mr. Hamel. He, though his own negligent actions, directly took the life of another human being. There is no excuse for which to defend his actions.

Adam, so is “Dooring“. Do not ride in the “Door Zone” and you cannot be struck by an opening car door. We are in total agreement on the notion of things being preventable. I just wish that the Urban Cyclist Community would “step up to the plate” and own their responsibility for choosing to ride in the “Door Zone“.

Reply by Dann B 2 hours ago
And is that first-hand witness Hamel?
Here’s the reality of the thing:
Whether or not he meant to do it, he got very drunk and got into a car. He then drove said car 20 mph over the speed limit (this is the reckless driving ticket) down a road that others were also using. Since his judgement was very impaired, he KILLED another human being. All through his actions. Let me recap them for you:

  1. very drunk
  2. driving
  3. speeding enough to have earned an extra ticket
  4. hitting and KILLING a cyclist. A cyclist who, from what I can see, was a friend to many people here.
  5. sending his cronies (whether directly or not) here to defend his actions

Do I villify him? I didn’t at first, but I certainly do now. He didn’t just “make a mistake”, he killed another person. He ended the life of a person who wasn’t doing anything to him. Frankly, any sentence that they hand to this person is not going to be enough. What he needs to do is to spend his time going forward being humble and doing all that he can to make amends and better the lives of others. Instead, I imagine he’ll likely spend his time talking about how it was just a little mistake and he really wasn’t at fault.
Oh, and comparing us to Syria? That’s just a step down from Godwinning the thread, which is about what I expect you to do next…

Reply by blair_ 3 hours ago
Until people stop living like they’re the only person on this planet, horrible tragedies like this will continue to happen. Every decision we make affects others – even if we never see it.

Well said.

Reply by Marion 3 hours ago
The “Well, who hasn’t gotten into a car drunk?” arguments are making me nauseous. Not everyone makes poor decisions, and if you think it’s kinda normal to drive drunk once in a while, you need to rethink your life choices and let this be the occasion that changes your habits for good, because you may and SHOULD be held responsible if you ever hurt someone while driving drunk. Never ok. You could kill somebody.
I’d very much love to go the court hearing, but I’m a bit intimidated by the court setting – would love to go with others.

The same applies to riding home on your bicycle after drinking for half the night. And the notion that you are the only one that suffers in such a situation (because supposedly bikes don’t kill) is probably indefensible.

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
Correct — the legal system has a more developed resolution of crime and punishment, thank GOD.
Everyone’s posts here do not reflect that; you all are attacking his character so viciously, absolutely on par with having murdered him in cold blood.
There’s a big gap between villify and victim — I’m certainly not suggesting, in any way, that he is a victim in that incident. I am not arguing that he isn’t completely at fault for the decision he made to drink & drive. He is.
But understand how very deeply he is suffering and will continue to suffer for it.
I don’t see the purpose or rationale in castigating him as a person. Yes, his actions were completely despicable –rip them apart all you like. I couldn’t agree more that drunk driving is one of the worst choices a person can make — totally inexcusable.
Here’s the problem with what you all are advocating in your lynch mob:
You’re suggesting that this happened because Ryne is horrible person. And what percentage of the population do you believe is inherently evil, like Ryne, apparently? Do you suggest we divert our efforts from curbing drunk driving to seeking out these evil people in our society to modify their souls as a preventative measure from something like this happening?
I can’t really see that being effective (or at all plausible).
In the same vein- I’m sure you’re all anti-gun; however in that case you’d like to blame the implement with which violence was committed, not the individual.
Blame the action, drunk driving; not the individual. That’s what the courts have come to recognize, he will be punished for drunk driving, not being a bad person.
I think we should all follow suit.

Save your breath for a different crowd. These folks smell blood in the water.

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
the who hasn’t gotten into a car drunk argument is ABSOLUTELY not equal to “I think it’s normal to drive drunk once in a while.” I will NEVER drive drunk. And since this accident, I have told every single person in my life who is close to me that if they drive drunk, that will be the end of our relationship. It’s an unacceptable choice. That’s SO not what I’m saying.
The who hasn’t gotten into a car drunk argument is in criticism of the abhorrent things being said, judgments being made. I’m saying if you’ve driven drunk, etc. — you are not allowed to judge someone as an individual for having done it.

Can’t we all just get along? I feel the need to lead a few rounds of Kumbaya.

Reply by Davo 3 hours ago
He may be a great person, I don’t know that but there is a possibility of that. But the person made the action (driving drunk at 730pm on a wednesday) and that was a horrible decision. I blame the person for that the same way I blame the person who pulled a trigger or the Priest that did the horrible thing to the minor. The Person is to blame not the action. Where is personal accountability? I guess not anywhere in your worldview.
“In the same vein- I’m sure you’re all anti-gun; however in that case you’d like to blame the implement with which violence was committed, not the individual.
Blame the action, drunk driving; not the individual. That’s what the courts have come to recognize, he will be punished for drunk driving, not being a bad person.

Reply by Dann B 3 hours ago
In the same post, you both said that he is responsible for his decision to drink and drive and said that we should blame the action and not the person. You do realize that these 2 things are nearly the opposite of each other, right?
You keep pointing out how he is suffering and will continue to do so. To that I respond: GOOD. It’s as if you expect us to feel sorry for wittle Ryne and his poor feewings getting hurted because people are villifying him for being an irresponsible asshat. Again, GOOD, suffer for what you have done.
You seem to have the kind of cognitive dissonance normally seen in cult members.

And to think that Dann B suggested that someone outside the ChainLink Forum was behaving like a “cult member“. Now that is rich!

Reply by Cameron 7.5 mi 3 hours ago
You are defending his actions by attempting to normalize his bad decisions. The everyone does it he just got unlucky argument, is both false and a pretty thinly veiled attempt to minimize his responsibility for what happened. The Mad Men era ended before Ryne was born, driving drunk isn’t something that everyone does. I’m the same age as Ryne, and never in my life have I lived in a community where drunk driving is considered normal or acceptable. Getting plastered and driving 2/3 over the limit is not an ubiquitous crime. Ryne made a bad decision that few people would view as normal or acceptable, and it cost someone their lilfe.

And yet ChainLinkers do this sort of thing every single weekend. The only saving grace is that they probably knock over a few garbage cans but gosh I would hate to be the motorist coming home in the evening who is run into by a drunk cyclist and have to spend time explaining to the police that I never saw him coming. That by the way happened here in West Chicago a few weeks ago.

Reply by Jeff Schneider 3 hours ago
chicagoBikes, I think you misunderstand most of us here.
I don’t know Mr. Hamel personally. I can’t weigh his decision to drive while completely blotto against the rest of his contribution to mankind. And I really wouldn’t care to try.
What I do care about is that I (and my children and grandchildren) walk, bike and drive in Chicago. And it’s a lot more dangerous than it needs to be. So I would really like the people responsible for making it so dangerous to be taken off the streets and punished appropriately, in order to keep them away from me and mine, and to deter others from similar behavior. That’s all.

Jeff you make a great point. But isn’t the reason for traffic laws all about keeping everyone safe? Why then do cyclists so no real harm in running red lights? I could understand it being done if you were in a real hurry trying to get to the hospital where your surgical skills are needed. But what makes that such a difficult habit to break for cyclists who are simply heading into work or returning home?

Reply by chicagoBikes 3 hours ago
Wow. This has completely flooded my inbox. I have a job, I can’t waste anymore time pontificating with you people on the merit of hating someone for an unintentional crime. Not to mention being emotionally exhausted from defending my statement against your whole crew. I will say, you are an accomplished group of passionately hateful & vindictive advocates. You’re doing an excellent job of ostracizing yourselves as a group from the rest of society & and diluting your message with disproportionate vitriol. I can’t tell you how glad I will be to leave this discussion & group, as I’m sure you will be. If your objective is to exclude divergent points of view and you believe that to be a productive avenue towards any sort of positive progress, I’d say mission accomplished.

Judging from the fact that most of this crowd is incessantly on the internet they are either unemployed or do not give their bosses a days worth of work.

Reply by David crZven 10.6 2 hours ago
Actually, drunk driving is NOT unintentional under most situations. Now if I held you down, poured bourbon down your throat, placed you in a car and put it in gear down a winding coast road, that would not be “intentional”. It would also not be intentional if you thought you were drinking water (assuming you can get around the fact that you voluntarily got behind the wheel) But in just about every other situation, you took the drink voluntarily and that makes the act “intentional”.

Who woke this guy up? Sheesh!

Reply by Duppie 13.5185km 2 hours ago
Did Ms. Chicagobikes just pick up her toys and leave the sandbox? Too bad. I enjoyed her brainfarts incoherent ramblings. But she at least lasted longer than her alter ego, “Nick”.
I am curious to see who comes out the woodwork next.
I am going to bet that whoever it is, this person will post a number of rambling replies, and then all of a sudden remember that they have a job to do, and leave….

And yet another late-comer:

Reply by SlowCoachOnTheRoad 2 hours ago
I am late to this, just heard about the awful accident and read some of the thread’s responses.

  1. The City should do more to make biking more hospitable (and Daley/Emanual’s efforts are slow but in the right direction, thanks)
  2. Lack of safety in Chicago has led to mostly young bikesters going through Stop signs and Red Lights which makes car drivers more aggressive toward us bikers – ironically. In Minneapolis improved safety for bikers has led more people of all ages to bike, what I would like to see in Chicago (of course it is a bigger city so that must pose a problem for the city). This has led to cars respecting bikers more.
  3. 1 and 2 are irrelevant to the recent tragedy – drunk driving is drunk driving is drunk driving – it can kill anyone (and so far other car drivers are the greatest victims, not bikers) and is already against the law anyway. Standards are already against this one – this is, in a sense, a mental health problem (people abusing alcohol).
  4. The most proven way to reduce drunk driving is through harsh penalties when caught driving drunk, lower thresholds of alcohol for drivers, and education.

I was almost with you until you gave that tired excuse for being a “scofflaw“. If safe lanes are needed and are likely to reduce scofflaw behavior then someone should explain to cyclists who run red lights on Kinzie that they can stop now. We have all the protected bike lanes we can handle on this street.

Reply by Lisa Curcio 4.0 mi 2 hours ago
If everyone just stopped posting here they would have nothing to respond to. Try it; you might like it.

Reply by Duppie 13.5185km 2 hours ago
You first! 😉

Even a kind-hearted person like Lisa is getting dissed. How on earth can you expect anything good to come of this forum? This is supposed to be the meeting place of cyclists and I would assume quite a few are motorists. And I would further assume that in a culture where alcohol is so thoroughly engrained in our cultural consciousness everyone here has either ridden a bike or driver a car with a bit more alcohol than was allowed. Oh, well.

I guess I really should be ecstatic that here is a clear and incontrovertible example of what makes the ChainLink such a cesspool. And I cannot be blamed for a single syllable of any of this.