Several readers have contacted us in the past few days to share alarming comments made by Portland business owners.
The comments make light of using cars to hurt and/or kill other people.
Tod Foulk has been the producer and owner of Portland Fashion Week since 2005. On October 18th he left a comment under a Facebook post by the Portland Police Association, the nonprofit union that represents Portland Police Bureau officers. The post was about Mayor Ted Wheeler’s attempts to get a handle on recent fights and protests that have led to violence in Portland streets.
Here’s what Foulk wrote:
#TEDWHEELER and his tiny hands cant seem to grasp this situation and nothing will come of it until an irate or hurt citizen fights back. #REGINALDDENNY showed me how to deal with a violent protest and that is to drive right thru killing as many as who will stand in my way
Reginald Denny is a reference to the incident where Denny, a truck driver, was removed from his vehicle and nearly beaten to death in the 1992 L.A. riots.
I contacted Foulk via Facebook and gave him a chance to clarify his comment. Here’s what I asked:
Hi Tod, I’m the publisher of a local transportation news blog. Several people have forwarded me the link to a Facebook comment where you espouse that the way to deal with protestors is to “drive right through killing…” them. Before I share this with the community, would you like to explain why you would say something like this? Thanks.
Here’s his response:
“it was due to the fact that lawless people are threatening the community at large with acts violence when they driving community won’t cowtow to terrorist tactics. see the 74 yr old man harassed? see the mob go through the pearl 2 yrs ago? see the antif thugs set fire with a molotov to target? not sorry when a good friend’s daughter needs to be ambulanced and this takes place. she almost died. care to interview her and her dad? i can make that happen easily enough. i saw reginald denny too get pulled out and beaten with a brick, that will NEVER happen to me and until the police handle the threats against drivers and take this seriously i will not stop for a mob mentality bent of physical harm,.
and the way to deal with them? taking out of context but i expect that these days from all press
but thanks for the chance to delve a little deeper on the subject!”
These views are in stark contrast to a “letter from the producer” posted by Foulk on the Fashion Week website. Foulk writes that his event is a “safe space” because he takes ethics so seriously. “I personally take everyone’s safety very very seriously,” he states in the letter.
Advertisement
The other comment we’ve been made aware of this week came via email from David Rappoport, owner of Hawthorne Cutlery. The email was sent on September 20th in response to a thread on the Hawthorne Boulevard Business Association email list.
The email subject was about “changes to crime prevention”. The screenshot is below:
If you don’t see the image above, Rappoport’s email says, “Sometimes running over bicyclists and pedestrians is the only way they’ll learn. Their new teachers/examples just might be the scooter riders.”
The email was sent from “swordrep” via the same email address listed on the contact page of the Hawthorne Cutlery website. Two different sources have confirmed to me that the email was sent by Rappoport. Both of the sources requested to remain anonymous. One of the sources said they didn’t want to be named due to fear that Rappoport “is armed and seems dangerous.”
I’ve reached out to Rappoport to give him a chance to clarify his email, but he has not responded.
When a local civic leader and a business owner have opinions like this and are brazen enough to share them in a public forum — especially in today’s emotionally and politically-charged civic climate — I think they should be taken seriously. Staying safe on the road relies on an unspoken contract between all of us that’s built on a foundation of responsibility, respect and consideration. Comments like this destroy that foundation.
UPDATE, 3:57 pm: I’ve heard back from Hawthorne Cutlery owner David Rappoport via email. Here’s what he wrote: “Not that I owe you or anyone else an explanation, but, I have a warped sense of humor. And that’s just what it was. HUMOR. Lighten up for Crissakes!”
— Jonathan Maus: (503) 706-8804, @jonathan_maus on Twitter and jonathan@bikeportland.org
Never miss a story. Sign-up for the daily BP Headlines email.
BikePortland needs your support.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Would it be legal to peaceably protest outside of these two business establishments? Sort of like a picket line, with signs and banners, respectfully yet visibly protesting. I’d be willing to drive down to Portland for something like that.
Tempting. But I think we’ve moved past the point where this might lead to insight, contrition, healing. I’m afraid doing so would chiefly play into the scenario the two (eagerly?) anticipate, confirm their Manichean view of the people around them and further polarize our community. Finding ways to expose people with such hateful views to others who have suffered the consequences of actions like those they celebrate would perhaps be more difficult but might end up more productive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_After_Hate
I think you’re missing the point. While I do not agree with running people over I can understand where this comes from. We’re fed up with people driving down to Portland to protest. I understand you want a peaceful pretest but at this point we’re beyond that. Any protest will bring counter protesters and that’s when the violence startss and unfortunately the mayor and Portland police will do nothing to stop it. Please drive down to Portland but the leave the protesting at home. We’ve had enough. To take it back to Rodney King “Can’t we all just get along”
“leave the protesting at home.”
Are you speaking to the fascists who have taken to bringing their grievances from (among other places) Vancouver to our city?
It would probably be good to differentiate. Many of us are from here, live here, and I don’t think appreciate being told where we should/shouldn’t protest.
They’re not bringing grievances, they come to fight. And so does Antifa. For the right promoter, there’s gold to be made.
It’s funny how each side thinks they are Angels and the others are Devils. Yet they end up acting the same way.
“they end up acting the same way”
Right.
You really should dig a little into this before making unsubstantiated sweeping statements like that. Antifascists and fascists are only equivalent if you think the groups they oppose are equivalent.
They are both extremist groups that like to fight. In that sense they are equivalent, although what they believe is very different. But both share a belief that physical intimidation is a valid way to convey their message.
Fine (or reprehensible) people on both sides?
Your posited equivalence is extremely superficial and misleading.
“But both share a belief that physical intimidation is a valid way to convey their message.”
Hardly. They function very differently in the political landscape; their goals, their ideology, their relationship to justice couldn’t be more different.
The only reason Antifa exists at all is that fascists are ascendant, have killed people (Mulugeta Seraw’s brutal murder right here in Portland happened thirty years ago next month), Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, and if we expand to right-wing terrorism* in this country the clear and present danger to groups of people who have done nothing to deserve violence or intimidation is impossible to deny.
If you really think that Antifa is equivalent to right wing groups in this country you need to document this, provide evidence.
* https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_terrorism_in_the_United_States
Are you telling me that people who would otherwise find brawling reprehensible have been galvanized by recent events and have felt compelled to come into the streets to fight against the Patriot Prayer?
I don’t know their rhetoric but I am sure if you were to ask PP why they are on the street, they’ll say they just want to peacefully express their political views, and have only taken up violence as a means of protecting themselves from Antifa agitators.
Hooey all around.
Peacefully?
Then why do they bring cars full of loaded guns and baseball bats with them?
See my comment about self-defence. And hooey.
The assertion was that they act the same. Both do seem to believe in violence, which makes them similar enough for me to tar them with the same brush. The only difference, as you say, is “against whom,” and the answer, predictably in both groups, is the other group, and that again is more of a similarity than a difference. When you look in the mirror, you see an image that doesn’t share a single “pixel” with the image of you, because it’s reversed. Yet you recognize it as you. Unless there’s something interfering with your pattern recognition skills.
A revolutionary is just a thug with a bunch of noble ideas. All the bloodiest ideas are super-duper-noble. And all the worst atrocities are committed by those convinced of their own moral righteousness. Groups in general might be best avoided. I’ve got fields to plow, metaphorically speaking, so if you’re here selling ideas that we can make manifest, if only I’ll just beat my plowshare into a sword, you’d better get off my lawn and go sell that shit to someone younger & more gullible.
“The only difference, as you say, is “against whom,” and the answer, predictably in both groups, is the other group, and that again is more of a similarity than a difference.”
Nope. Fascists may expect to meet anti fascists in the streets of Portland, but their reason for existence are not anti fascists but classes of people found in their racist taxonomies, people they seek to terrorize or exterminate, not because of anything those people do or believe but because their fascist ideology identifies them as inherently undeserving.
I personally believe in nonviolence, but when people assert foolish equivalencies I’ll side with the anti fascists any day.
You give those guys too much credit. Some may believe what you say, but many just want to mix it up with the “snowflakes”. The only reason to march in Portland is because they enjoy the reaction, which includes the chance to brawl with anti fascists, who are more than happy to play their role.
It feels like Fight Club, but I can’t really talk more about that.
This is beyond silly, your claim that there are wannabes among them.
Fascists and Antifascists are real groups with histories that believe very different things. I was under the impression we were talking about them, not your (unsubstantiated) assumption that some among these may be posers.
Not poseurs, brawlers and thugs. I believe many of those showing up with Patriot Prayer couldn’t tell you the first thing about what Fascism is about.
“couldn’t tell you the first thing about what Fascism is about.”
Eighty years ago, in November 1938, we can probably say that some who participated in what came to be known as Kristallnacht were also brawlers and thugs, not died in the wool fascists.
So?
I’m having a very hard time understanding where you’re going with this.
I’m sorry I can’t be much clearer than I have been:
The only reason to march in Portland is because they enjoy the reaction, which includes the chance to brawl with anti fascists, who are more than happy to play their role.
You may disagree with me, but it is hardly “beyond silly”.
If you are suggesting that fascists are just smoke and mirrors (are you?) then you might want to think about Jeremy Christian, just to name the most obvious.
“The only reason to march in Portland is because they enjoy the reaction,”
The *only* reason?
How do you know so precisely what motivates them?
And if they are not really fascists, just pretending to be fascists, how do we distinguish the real from the fake?
Or are you suggesting there are no real ones, that we have been misled, we can all go home?
For most of them, conflict seeking is the primary reason they come. And yes, we should all go home. If we do, they won’t march here anymore. Marching around empty streets isn’t nearly as fun as a fight. It actually kind of sucks.
“drive down to Portland” you left of the first part which differentiates between people in Portland and people driving down to Portland.
“I will not stop for a mob mentality bent of physical harm.”
I’m surprised he felt the need to go back 26 years when James Alex Fields is a much more obvious role model.
Like any true fan, he prides himself on using the more obscure reference.
Trust me, he doesn’t have any problem at all with that act of violence.
Interesting article. I would say both leaders have two different views. The first seems more derived from the lack of leadership that we are getting from our mayor. I wonder if the white gentlemen telling the other white gentlemen (in the car) to “keep going whitey!” Will face hate speech charges? Also, threatening a person and then bashing up their car is a crime. Where were the police? From the photos they were sittings on their butts and watching it. That is sad. It’s sad that Ted is soft. All of this is out of hand. And so as it is, and what I think the first person you quoted as saying and I would do as well, flee for my personal safety. If people want to beat up cars that’s up to them but then to complain about the driver escaping a hate filled situation is silly. We need better policing and we need someone who can lead so that we don’t have situations like this. It’s sad that a 74 year old man had to bear the brunt of angry Portlanders.
The second quote, is dumb. He won’t respond because he won’t want to take ownership of those comments and if the media gave him any pressure he’ll probably say someone else wrote it without his knowledge. He should be held accountable as he wasn’t referring to a situation that could’ve involved a life or death situation.
What’s a “hate speech charge”? But never mind your made up crime, I’m more concerned how you read his comments so charitably. Why does fleeing for your personal safety equate to “drive right thru killing as many as who will stand in my way”? There’s no other way to flee than killing as many people as you can?
Using someone’s race against them in a negative way is pretty clear. They don’t put that in the Love Language book but rather Hate Language book. But I digress, the older man in the vehicle could be deemed as more vunerable then the youthful and clearly more stronger crowds around him. Not sure if you saw the video but it seems rather clear what happened. He was driving and then stopped by a group of people who obviously hareassed him. Like that’s literally what happened, they called him names and began destroying his car. He attempts to avoid the crowd by turning right but that wasn’t good enough for the crowd. It’s CLEARLY not someone that is looking to run people over. I mean, we’ve sadly seen too many of those videos right? We should be able to tell the difference by now. And when someone fears for their life they either fight or flight. I’d say it’s clear that he was fleeing. Did you need anymore info? If so I put the link up for you. Fearing for one’s life will more than likely hold up in the court of law. I can also give examples of such if needed. Maybe if there were more peaceful protests/ rallies then there wouldn’t be events like this. But sadly, Ted isn’t the person to lead the PPB and I’d argue our city but that’s not up for debate for another two years.
The first comments seem to reflect these sentiments.
The “flight” part of “Fight or Flight” doesn’t really apply when you are operating a 4,000lb machine around a bunch of soft, fleshy bodies. It’s just Fight or Fight at that point.
I know people like cool comebacks but if the driver wanted to kill someone I think he would’ve. I get your point but his mindset was more of getting the h*ll out of there then “running over a bunch of people.”
I’m just stating the reality. For me, his mindset doesn’t really matter. Actions are more important.
Except you seem to be skipping over the fact that in this country premeditated violence against minorities (of all varieties) is a daily occurrence. Someone (anyone) could feel emboldened by language that the speaker feels is ‘just a joke.’
I saw two videos. In the first he was asked to make a right turn because people were in the street ahead. Looks like he decided to drive toward the people, and then kept going when the person was on the hood of his car. He then drives off and stops down the street to continue the conflict.
Broken windows? I didn’t state anything about broken windows. Maybe you read that somewhere else?
And to say they were I t he crosswalk is laughable considering they were blocking the entire intersection. #smh
And I just do not buy the fight or flight argument that he chose “flight.” Watch the video. He actually stops and gets out of his vehicle to further confront the protesters after driving a half block away.
Hmm. Denny didn’t run over anyone. He was an unfortunate victim. The racial reference however is telling.
I think what the original comment was portraying was the fact that Denny didn’t act and paid the price unlike the gentleman in Portland that was clearly a victim and is somehow vilified.
The gentleman who tried to run people over and took two days to come forward to police is a “victim?” No, that person is guilty of hit and run. Regardless of who broke who’s window.
He didn’t take two days to come forward, the police reported that he called them immediately after the incident.
What are the guidelines for individuals to express their (admittedly stupid) views without being made a public target here on BP?
‘Don’t advocate harming others’ is a pretty simple rule of thumb.
Facebook no doubt has some fine print that speaks to this.
The HBBA is subject to open meeting laws. Consequently their email exchanges are in principle public.
I’m not asking about the fine print.
I’m asking when a private individual’s expression of personal opinion becomes fair game for a blog post identifying the person, calling them out for public scorn, making statements about their character (“armed and seems dangerous”) and potentially causing blog readers to react in a way that harms the person’s livelihood (“There’s an event and a business I will no longer patronize”).
BP should think hard about whether stuff like this is really blog-worthy and whether posts like this are wise.
“Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the profit margins of the guy advocating violence against cyclists and pedestrians.”
Helluva hill to die on.
Hi John,
I did think long and hard about this. Both of these men are public figures and they made their statements in public places. I didn’t identify them. Everyone on the HBBA email list knew the email came from Rappoport. Everyone on the public FB post knows the identity of Tod Foulk. So I didn’t unearth anyone’s identity here. I had people emailing about this. People who were very concerned about the statements. And these statements matter because they make light of — and in some ways encourage — what I consider to be very serious traffic safety/cultural issues that I think can have an real influence what people feel is acceptable/normal behavior. I am out there on my bike with my 7-yr-old boy riding to school every day mere inches away from people in huge cars and I need them to see us as having every bit as much right to respect and safety as anyone else — regardless of what they are doing in the street (except perhaps if someone is charging at an auto user with a weapon, then there’s self-defense of course, but I digress). I think the community has a right to know when someone in a position of influence (like a business owner or event producer) has feelings like this. These guys are adults. They shouldn’t be allowed to espouse dangerous ideas/opinions and then sit back and have no accountability for them.
Minimizing/normalizing violence against other road users is a red line for me in terms of editorial decision-making. Always has been, always will be.
It is not my favorite type of post, but I believe it is necessary.
Yep. The road is potentially, and sometimes actually, pretty darned metoo or livesmatter for those not in cars (and even sometimes in cars). Even apparent left-leaners rant and bully about road users like they never would about things related to gender and race. Seems like it’s among the last venues for socially acceptable hate. Maybe the hypocrisy is getting more conspicuous?
Anything you post on the internet is fair game for anyone to publicize. I think you should be asking yourself why these small business owners are so willing to share disturbing, stupid opinions in a town as sensitive and socially conscious as Portland
To be private speech, the speech must not be made public. Posts on Facebook are not private. Email may be private, depending on distribution and service provider rules.
What do you mean John? Can you clarify what it is that you are asking? Happy to answer your question.
I have sent you an email.
Business owners publicly advocate running bikers over and you’re surprised it shows up on a local bike blog?!?!?
Asking for a friend?
This is disgusting, several people have actually tried to drive through Portland protests, and it’s lucky that nobody has been killed. These men should both lose their jobs and hopefully take their time unemployed to reflect on their murderous comments.
Surely calling for their lives to be ruined over some callous keyboard warrior comments will sway them to your perspective; that technique never backfires at all! Great idea.
Jeering is easy.
And you are correct that those who would polarize our society by spreading hate, lies, division, and undermining facts are setting the terms of debate. But how would you suggest we move forward? What would you suggest be done in this situation?
Why do we have to “do” something?
Doing nothing is certainly an option though I wouldn’t countenance it.
People making threats in a public or quasi public forum seems worth calling out, nipping in the bud, making an example of.
Thank you for policing the internet — it’s a terrible job, and I’m glad I don’t have it.
There is no charge.
Nothing should be done. Move on.
There’s an event and a business I will no longer patronize.
Not so surprised by the cutlery guy, but the producer and owner of Portland Fashion Week should know better, I’m gonna guess he’s got a lot of LGBTQ friends that are probably just as vulnerable as cyclists and pedestrians in today’s political climate….
Yup. ?And I was about to take batch of knifes over to get sharpened too.
Am I going to have to go back to concealed carrying a handgun while bike commuting? I stopped because, well, Portland was safe, and I wasn’t bike commuting at 1 AM through the industrial part of town any more (which isn’t even industrial any more.) But if I have to worry about numbnuts trying to run me down on purpose, I might have to start again…
Or if you have to worry about a crowd, dressed in black wearing masks….
especially if you’re an out fascist.
Just wear this shirt tucked into your pants while your bike and enjoy all the space drivers give you.
https://www.spreadshirt.ca/gun+tucked+men-s+premium+t-shirt-D11775497
“Civic Leader” is a real long stretch for a fashion show organizer whom it stands to reason 99.9% of Portlanders have never heard of.
I not sure either of these individuals has thought through the logical outcome of everyone following such a code of conduct. If it is ok to run over cyclists or pedestrians when you feel threatened, then by logical extension it would be ok for a crowd of parents at a grade school who feel their children are threatened by a speeding or careless driver to pull the dangerous scofflaw from their vehicle at the fist stop sign and beat them senseless to make sure they can’t hurt their kids. Calling out this kind opinion is important because the unintended consequences of this type of thinking are enormous.
Why get close to the dangerous vehicle? This is America, where you can practice the 2nd Amendment from a safe distance if anything threatens you.
It’s almost like the protesters are inviting a confrontation and then inserting themselves in it, thus making themselves “victims”.
Heather Heyer?
It would be helpful if you were a little clearer about who you are talking about.
You should totally set up a rally, on the sidewalk.
A sudden, permanent jolt up to European prices for gasoline would be so good for this country…………………
Just stay tuned, It looks like the Saudi-backed petro-dollar arrangement that was put in place by Henry Kissinger after the twin gas crisis of the 70’s may be quickly coming to an end courtesy of the recent Skullduggery in the Saudi embassy in Turkey. Combine that with our foreign policy of making enemies with many of the other remaining major producers of of conventional crude oil ( Russia, Iran, Venezuala) and we may see such european style prices in the near future. Those advocating violence against cyclists may soon see themselves astride a two wheeled human-powered steed.
My guess is that our leader plans to sell out our country’s standing even further to line his pockets instead.
Now don’t go giving me false hopes. It’s been so long since I rolled along streets filled with other people on bikes that I almost doubt the memories.
Since the US is now the world’s largest oil producer I don’t think we’re very worried about a gas crisis.
It is called strength through exhaustion, last gasp, the race for what’s left.
The current global oil field decline rate is at 4.5% per year. You do the math.
Then we would have to listen about how it is regressive.
Sounds like “old Portland” to me. And people want to go back to that?
It sounds like this guy is one of those “I tells it like it is” types, who is most likely not the brightest bulb.
UPDATE, 3:57 pm: I’ve heard back from Hawthorne Cutlery owner David Rappoport via email. Here’s what he wrote: “Not that I owe you or anyone else an explanation, but, I have a warped sense of humor. And that’s just what it was. HUMOR. Lighten up for Crissakes!”
Does anyone think this guy would find it funny if people in the bike community told “warped humor” jokes about vandalizing all the cars parked along his stretch of Hawthorne or jokes about burning down knife stores.
Eliminationist rhetoric is always somehow “just a joke” when people get called out on it.
Claiming that his remarks are humorous also doesn’t change anything. The threat of violence against an out group minority is still there. He’s just revealed in addition, that he thinks that violence against cyclists and pedestrians is funny.
is it a suggestion that we eliminate that kind of speech?
what do you think?
I’ve given David a little business in the past. I won’t be doing that again. Hopefully he thinks that’s funny as well.
Their Yelp page paints a pretty clear picture of Hawthorne Cutlery (and specifically the people who work there). David R’s petty responses to 3-year-old mildly critical reviews are the icing on the cake.
Although it is clearly wrong to physically harm anyone I think the statement that there is a contract between pedestrians and drivers kind of goes out the window when both parties act illegally. If the pedestrians are protestors blocking a roadway they are obligated to move to allow crosstraffic. I don’t think they should be run over but they should certainly be ticketed. See ORS 814.070 or reference a story on your own site. https://bikeportland.org/2014/12/14/police-ticket-dont-shoot-protestor-run-passing-driver-116412.
It’s one thing to say that the police should ticket people who are blocking the roadway, and another to say, “Sometimes running over bicyclists and pedestrians is the only way they’ll learn.”
Sounds like another individual with an ax to grind that really has no concept of what the traffic laws that apply to motorists, and even more so to bicyclists, actually say.
Pedestrians who have entered a crosswalk (there is a legal crosswalk at every corner, both ways) have absolute right of way. It’s a traffic law that doesn’t have exceptions. Motor vehicles also have a duty to avoid, and yield to, pedestrians who are crossing illegally. Drivers aren’t ever privileged to run over other people.
Okay, so let’s grant that scofflaw pedestrians should be cited. (For the record, I disagree, but let’s roll with it.) How does that give another citizen the right to attack them? Apparently, private citizens can initiate a process by which they can get citations issued, but it’s rather barbaric to say that motorists can be judge, jury and executioner.
If you’re going to pretend to be a rule of law person, please advocate for it throughout. If you just want to use someone’s failure to follow the letter of the law as an excuse for car supremacy and traffic violence, you’re not really in favor of the rule of law.
Stop acting so “holier than thou” while picking on two people who happen to own small businesses. Do you think that you might be able to get a mob and harass these poor guy’s because they said something flippant and you have found where they do business?
In the last week I’ve had to twice jump out of the way of bicyclists who thought that they owned the sidewalk and forced me to yield to them. How many bicyclists still believe that they have the right of way over pedestrians? Or is it that they just don’t give a damn?
When bicyclists start following the rules and laws then you may have room to complain, until then get yourself familiarized with the Oregon Driving Law’s.
I think that I’ll have a heart attack the next time I see a bicycle stop at a traffic sign.
“When bicyclists start following the rules…”
Your parameters are showing.
“get yourself familiarized with the Oregon Driving Law’s (sic)”
I’m willing to bet that the regular reader here is more familiar with Oregon driving laws than Clive is.
I have to wait for 100% of all cyclists to follow the laws at all times and then I get to complain? So we having an entitled driver dictating to cyclists in a thread about entitled driving?
Hopefully you do.
Excuse me, but how many people have been killed this year by cyclists? How many by scofflaw motorists? Take your time, this might be difficult.
I’ll just add that much of the unlawful behavior I see by people on bikes is the result of them trying to adapt to scofflaw motorists whose illegal and unsafe driving habits make our streets difficult for some people to ride on.
We can look at totals or at frequency. I’m guessing 99.9% of motorists have not killed anyone.
Your point being?
We’ll see. If climate change causes the end of humanity, 100% of drivers will be partially responsible.
As will 100% of everybody.
Sigh.
Some people actually use almost no fossil fuels, and pretending otherwise is unhelpful.
Your reflexive need to insist that distinctions, categories, rankings, matters of degree are all meaningless is tiresome.
Some people who own and use an automobile drive hardly at all, while others drive upwards of 100,000 miles per year. Similarly with non-drivers: some eat meat every day, order on Amazon hundreds of times per year, and crank up the AC with the windows open, while others are vegan and don’t own anything with a semiconductor.
The statement I responded to lumped those who drive hardly drive with those who drive 100,000 miles per year. I pointed out exactly what you did: people who do not drive but eat meat may consume more fossil fuels than a driver who rarely drives but eats a vegan diet and line-dries their clothes.
We all contribute to climate change, and we all do so to a different degree; driving is only one factor in the equation.
The constant demonizing of people for a single dimension of their life is just tiring.
Sounds like reasonable advice. Do you think I could pick up a copy of the Oregon Driving Law’s at the same bookstore where I got my copy of The Law’s of Punctuation?
“In the last week I’ve had to twice jump out of the way of bicyclists who thought that they owned the sidewalk and forced me to yield to them.”
Or from their point of view you moved aside so that they could pass by you.
You don’t know that you had to jump out of the way.
I’ve never jumped out of the way and every cyclist doing that has given me the right of way.
You get to choose your action. Don’t blame your choice on a straw-man.
There actually was a case a couple years ago where a Portland business decided it was appropriate to run people over, and did. The Portland Spirit was unhappy that it was blocked from moving forward by a crowd in hundreds of boats watching the Red Bull Flugtag event in the Willamette downtown. So the captain gave a 5-honk warning and plowed through dozens of boats. The Coast Guard ruled he was out of line. The basic ruling was, “Yes, the boats shouldn’t have been there, but the law still requires above all that a captain avoid collisions. Honking your horn doesn’t give you the right to mow people down.”
The crazy thing was that he felt that since he gave the warning, he truly believed he had a right to proceed–and DID–no matter that he could have killed people. This was the captain, not the company head, but as I recall the company defended his decision, at least at first.
So I don’t mind seeing criticism of people advocating such behavior, even if they’re “joking”.
When cyclists start following the rules and laws then you may have room to complain about boat captains!
Lots of cyclists follow rules. “Cyclists” are not a uniform block any more than drivers are. George W. Bush and Barack Obama were both avid bike riders.
Drivers break laws all the time, killing thousands of people across the country every year. Under your logic, cyclists should be able to say, “When drivers start following the rules and laws then you may have room to complain about cyclists!”
And don’t take my word about the captain being out of line. I’m just agreeing with the determination made by the Coast Guard after their official investigation.
And back on the subject of advocating running people over, every official legal authority, meaning every police and sheriff’s department in the country, will agree that nobody should retaliate against others by driving over them. So the position this article takes–that advocating that type of violence is wrong–is supported by our law enforcement authorities.
I’m sure those same authorities would also agree that one group (say boat captains) is not excused from obeying laws just because some of those in another group (say cyclists) may not be. Why do you take the opposite position? Do you not respect our law enforcement agencies?
Oops, bendite, I see you were being facetious (is that the right term?). I hadn’t read your comment higher up until now. At least I know you’ll know why I thought your comment wasn’t tongue-in-cheek, seeing as someone else already made the “if you cyclists would only start obeying the rules” comment, and you called them out on it.
it’s trite in print, but you made me laugh out loud. the cat and my partner stared at me too.
Same here, once I realized it wasn’t a serious comment.
Same goes the other way– when I see ALL DRIVERS following the rules and laws then they can complain about other road users who don’t.
So far, 99.8% of the drivers I see on a daily basis (both from my vantage point as a pedestrian as well as from behind the windshield as a driver) absolutely FAIL at following even the most basic rules and laws– I’m talking turn signal usage, staying within their lane, stopping at red lights before turning right on red (if it’s allowed), etc.
It’s stunning how many terrible drivers we have in the metro area.
“but but but NOT ALL CAR DRIVERS” yeah right. Check yourself, friends, stop being on autopilot when you drive and actually see how bad you are at it.
really. ? ive never been in my 38 years of portland, but im tempted to walk by and check the signs now. not cool. not cool.
I personally disagree with these road blockers. Roads are made for cars . With that being said if my car was to run one of the idiots over oh well.If the worthless liberal mayor will allow these protestors to disobey the law then ok whatever I can as well. Would I intentionally hit someone no I wouldn’t. But heck I’m driving and the road is for driving so if your stupid enough to park your cry baby liberal self in the road oh well. I’m neither left or right. I’m neutral I think politics are stupid. Bit not as stupid as idiot protesters.
Parody.
“Roads are made for cars .”
Unfortunately for you, Carlton Reid not only disagrees with you but wrote a book about it:
http://roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/fulltext/
Sounds like you’re living in the wrong universe if you think roads are made for cars, cars drive themselves, politics are stupid and protesters are idiots. Maybe you’d prefer to live inside a Hot Wheels set?
When you’re helpless to control your vehicle.
The Hawthorne Cutlery guy is just a harmless old guy with a slightly punk edge and hopelessly outdated sense of humor. I would not take it that seriously. Go to his shop and you will immediately grasp that he, and it, are of another era.
I sorta hate to admit it but I think he represents a type of Portlander that no longer exists or tolerated. Sometimes people who are not PR perfectionists just say dumb stuff.
Now, if he were the mayor or Jeff Bezos, this would be a different story.
sorry K, the Thought Police have spoken.
There is absolutely 0 nuance that can be applied to either statement any longer to perhaps suggest either emotional hyperbole nor poor humor.
As a Portland native, who knows “old Portland” well; I say good riddance. I think it would be hard to argue that “edgy” people who are short on brain cells are making this city a better place to live. I don’t think that anything really needs to come of this information, but I hope that a few people are better-informed now, and can choose where they want to spend their money based on this information.
Disagree. How much stuff has to come out of the woodwork before we say, no, talking about personal violence isn’t funny? People who “roll coal” with their dirty diesel engines might say it’s funny. Someone might be amused to just drive really close to another person but a slight mistake and whoops you are now dead for a very long time.
“represents a type of Portlander that no longer exists or tolerated”
good riddance.
On the other hand, if Mr. Rappaport is ever involved in a crash with a cyclist or pedestrian, their lawyer is going to have a field day with his comments.
I knew of a pizza delivery guy who for a joke drew some silhouettes of pedestrians on the side of his car, similar to WWI flying aces marking each plane they’d shot down. Then one night he hit a person walking in front of him. He felt terrible, and also worried that the police would see his markings and think he had a flippant attitude–which he did have up to that point.
Yeah that hundred dollar failure to yield ticket is really going to sting..
Well, it might not even come to that. I mean, one could hit a child in a crosswalk near a school with plenty of witnesses, and receive no citation at all.
You can shoot someone point blank and not get even get scolded. What a world!
Yep, almost gives gun owners parity with motorists!
This is where we are now with BP, questioning people’s comments on the internet.
That is not a good joke, so much disrespect to the bikes and pedestrian.
Also not coo:
“For the record, I am not afraid to hit someone with my car as an act of aggression,” she says. “I think polite drivers should be met only with aggression, to teach them a lesson.”
Carrie Brownstein, November 2, 2010 Willamette Week interview
https://www.wweek.com/portland/article-16676-mock-star.html
When did joking about killing become funny?
Since Pulp Fiction?
Interesting that just in the week since you asked this ‘why bother? question we’ve witnessed three dramatic incidents of politically motivated violence in this country, two of which resulted in deaths of minorities, and the third involved mailing more than a dozen? bombs, or objects meant to suggest bombs, to political targets identified by our dreadful president.
Someone saying something ugly on the internet is not a call to action for me. If it is to you, I’d be interested to know what you’ve done.
what a lame headline, typical of the media taking things out of context lol but when you can’t really write you can vilify. and i DO stand by my comments, anyone committing violence on anyone else in my presence will be met with equal force. be that an innocent being mobbed and attacked, or a simple bike rider on a ride. fools.
ps….journalst? HARDLY! just another person behind a keyboard looking for ”readers”. lol
and let’s see if this is ”moderated” into the delete file!
hey jonathan maus, i think the national enquirer is hiring!