Welcome to the week. Here are the most notable news items our community has come across in the past seven days…
Anti-car streets are popular: The people of Paris just voted to pedestrianize 500 more streets in an effort to reduce driving in the city. It’s almost as if, when your government goes big on lefty policies and then proves they can implement them, it’s actually good politics. Imagine that! (Reuters)
Steel is real (expensive): Bike chains are one of the few bike-related products that have been impacted by Trump’s 25% U.S. tariff on steel and aluminum. Meanwhile, the industry is scrambling to understand which products will be impacted. (Bicycle Retailer)
Teen drivers arrested for murder: Video footage (not shown at link) from inside a car driven by a 13-year old revealed that the young boys purposely rammed into a cyclist and killed him. (ABC News)
Golden Age of family biking: Another mainstream journalist has had their life so altered by the use of an e-bike they were moved to write a story about it. In this case, the author shares how an e-bike has become a cherished family vehicle. (The Atlantic)
Big time bike racing stateside: Such great news to hear that a company has stepped up to host the Tour of Colorado in 2026, bringing a major stage race back to American soil. (Cycling Weekly)
Distracted cop: A police officer in Vermont faces felony charges after his body camera captured footage of him watching a YouTube video on his in-car monitor at the same time he hit and killed a cyclist. (Burlington Free Press)
Oregon and e-bikes: A new electric bike bill being discussed down in Salem would define micromobility devices and lower the age for legal riding from 16 to 12. (The Oregonian)
The ‘Couv goes big?: If the Vancouver City Council got its way, they’d annex the entire, 56 square-mile urban growth area and become the second largest city in Washington overnight. (The Columbian)
Tesla terrorism: A Florida man intentionally drove his car into a crowd of protestors at a Tesla dealership, causing several injuries. Not surprising given that the Trump administration is calling the peaceful protests “domestic terrorism”. (WPTV)
Motonormativity and how to influence people: Fascinating new research into why some people have normalized use of automobiles to such an extent that it impacts how they think about other types of mobility gives us clues on how to change their minds. (Science Direct)
Thanks to everyone who sent in links this week. The Monday Roundup is a community effort, so please feel free to send us any great stories you come across.
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.
Do you have a citation for that rather alarming claim? I could not find one.
I did an internet search of “trump domestic terrorism” and it brought up many examples from multiple sources.
Did you find any that were specific to peaceful protests, as opposed to ones involving violence or vandalism? (Which, to be clear, aren’t terrorism either, but I was responding to a claim specifically referencing peaceful protest).
They are saying that this woman is “pro-Hamas” because she participated peacefully in a protest against the genocide in Gaza. It seems pretty clear to me that “pro-Hamas” is being used interchangeably with labeling someone a terrorist. The university subsequently cleared her of any wrongdoing around her protesting but the GOP administration is now attempting to arrest and either deport or disappear her despite her permanent resident status.
https://thehill.com/homenews/education/5211593-columbia-student-trump-deportation-ice-khalil/
That is a different thing entirely and not what we are discussing here. Saying someone is “pro Hamas” is not at all the same thing as saying they are a terrorist. There are people on this forum who have expressed pro Hamas sentiments; I don’t think there’s anyone here who is a terrorist.
The Trump admin has declared that being pro Hamas is a terrorist act so I have no idea what you are talking about.
They have people in detention for it right now.
Do you read any news besides this forum?
I am really sorry that MAGA viewpoints have invaded this space.
Please provide a citation.
Apparently you can’t read bjorn’s post above?
Someone does not read the news…
I’m fairly certain this is what BB is referring to: https://apnews.com/article/columbia-university-mahmoud-khalil-ice-15014bcbb921f21a9f704d5acdcae7a8
I’m pretty sure it is too which is why I wanted to clarify. The article made no mention of anyone being accused of terrorist acts, so if this is in fact the incident referenced, BB’s description is inaccurate and hyperbolic.
As I said before, there’s enough bad stuff going on that we don’t need to make things up. Transparent lies just make our position weaker.
They are arresting people for peaceful protests which you continue to spin as something else.
MAGA people are just willfully dumb.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/03/14/video-columbia-university-student-whose-visa-was-revoked-supporting-hamas-and
Is this a LIE?
Saying that Ranjani Srinivasan was accused of committing a terrorist attack would be a lie, yes. Saying that her student visa was revoked would not be. But I literally have no idea what you are saying anymore because you’re all over the place and not making any coherent point that I can see, just making accusation after accusation at everyone you can think of.
I know you’ll accuse me of the same (just as you accuse me of everything else) so let me make it clear. My point is that Jonathan’s claim that Trump called peaceful protest “terrorism” appears to be false, or, at best, unsubstantiated. And many of the statements you’ve made in defense of that claim are also false, or, at best, unsubstantiated.
I value the truth and accuracy. You, obviously, do not.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqjdg4x08ylo
First line
Thanks; that first line you are referring to is:
The BBC is not claiming this is in reference to peaceful protests, and every other source I’ve found reporting on this has described it as a reference to violent protests. I haven’t been able to find Trump’s actual comments in context online, so I can’t determine that myself.
Labeling even violent protests “terrorism” is pretty bad, but sadly, it’s not unprecedented.
It is very clear what Trump means, you don’t have to Sane wash it for us.
Beat a cop up in the J6 insurrection and get a pass from him, Key a Tesla and you get 20 YEARS.
JFC, do you just play dense on the internet?
Isn’t what Trump actually says and does bad enough? Do you really need to fictionalize it to make it worse?
Aw yes, what is going on right now is just benign isn’t it.
What fiction are you talking about?
He pardoned and released people who tried to kill cops and overthrow an election and his AG is asking for 20 year sentences for people who damaged some cars.
That is not fiction unless you are willfully playing Dumb.
The claim that Trump called peaceful protests terrorism. You know, what’s being discussed in this thread.
Your “fine lining” of what Trump says and what he does is beyond what even most MAGA cult people think about him.
They know what he means, you have progressed from Contrarian to beyond MAGA, quite the accomplishment.
I’m not sure what “fine lining” is, but Jonathan made a factual assertion, and I think it is very likely to be wrong. Not in a slight gradient, depends how you interpret it sort of way, but in a binary right/wrong black/white sort of way.
Some of us still think that facts matter.
Facts and Trump have zero relationship to each other because there are millions of fools and some fools here who take him at his word.
Because Trump is a liar, you should be too?
“Aw yes, what is going on right now is just benign isn’t it.”
Watts never said that. In fact from what I’ve seen, they’re definitely not a Trump fan.
They definitely come across as a Musk fan
I am a fan of the truth, as unfashionable as that may sound to you.
Here’s the FBI’s definition of domestic terrorism. Seems like shooting up the Tigard Tesla dealership fits…..
“…ideologically driven crimes committed by individuals in the United States that are intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or influence the policy or conduct of a government.”
The reason I don’t like that definition is that to me terrorism involves violence against people. There are many crimes intended to influence government policy that do not seem like terrorism.
One example is the release of classified information by Edward Snowden, a serious ideologically motivated felony committed expressly to change government policy. That was not terrorism, but it fits the definition you provided.
But the definition of terrorism is not really at issue here, only the unsubstantiated claim that Trump called peaceful protest terrorism. That question is not definitional, it instead hinges on a simple historical fact about the world involving very well documented events.
The bbc article uses two quotes that could refer to two different events or the same one, it’s unclear.
“People protesting against Tesla should be labelled domestic terrorists, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday”
“Trump said they were “harming a great American company”, and anyone using violence against the electric carmaker would “go through hell”.
As usual with modern reactive journalism (I’m not lumping BP into that category) the writing does not really answer if the “domestic terrorism” refers to the actually peaceful protests which I personally support or the wild and insane acts of fiery vandalism and shootings which I certainly don’t support.
I think everyone would be wise to recognize that we shouldn’t have to wonder if Trump actually referred to the peaceful protests or not. That we have to wonder is a failing on the part of our president. Or maybe that’s his intention, and that’s why BB is calling Watts dense. If you ask me, anyone who hasn’t had their head in the sand since at least 2016 should be able to see that his intent, and that of his ilk, is to discredit protesters in general, because protest is the only potentially meaningful tool the public has in pushing back against an unresponsive and unrepresentative government.
Hi Caleb,
I think we should indeed wonder if trump is calling those who gather peacefully (for the most part) terrorists or if he is calling people who destroy things terrorists. The later is arguable while the former would be indefensible.
This thread is because of a single sentence and many are trying to stretch it out and cover all of trumps excesses, mistakes and incredibly bad choices. As Watts pointed out, JM stated that…
Not surprising given that the Trump administration is calling the peaceful protests “domestic terrorism”.
The linked article with that definitive statement does not support such a statement. I am still waiting for JM or anyone to chime in and produce an article or documentation to support or disprove that statement.
I believe that accuracy and truth can still exist in journalism. Once we give up on expecting to know reality as best we can than it doesn’t really matter what you call the government, fascist, communist, capitalist, republican (the type of government, not the political party) or a democracy it won’t matter because the lies will occlude whatever is really happening.
Thank you. Some people contort themselves into pretzels to deny the obvious because they mostly agree with Trump policies so always attempt to make excuses for his obvious totalitarian viewpoint.
Elon Musk on the other hand has a bunch of fan boys who can’t comprehend that he is basically just a Rich idiot.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-suggests-tesla-vandals-prison-el-salvador/story?id=120019715
That article clearly references vandalism, arson, gunfire, and destruction of property, not peaceful protest.
100%, otherwise known as terrorism of the domestic variety.
Yes*, as distinct from the peaceful protest that others are claiming.
*Well, actually no; I don’t generally regard those things as terrorism, but that’s not important here.
Damaging Vehicles is Terrorism by whose definition?
It’s vandalism pure and simple.
Not cool but NOT Terrorism.
Were you the BLM protests that got out of hand and damaged some property Terrorism?
You sound just like Trump, that’s how fascists label people they want to get rid of.
“Domestic terrorism is defined as ideologically driven, violent, and criminal acts committed by individuals or groups within a nation to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence government policy, or affect the government’s conduct”
Not sure how many boxes you need checked. Everyone should want to get rid of people who throw tantrums, damage things that aren’t theirs, and expect anyone to give any concern to what they want changed.
J6 perpetrators were TERRORISTS under any definition you just listed and they are walking around free as we speak and 3 people are getting prosecuted by the AG for damaging cars by Trumps attorney general and she is seeking 20 years in prison for them.
MAGA defenders go to any hypocritical stand to defend a cult leader. So bizarre.
Yep J6 was terrorism and so was shooting up the Tesla showroom in Tigard.
No doubt there is hypocrisy in Trump’s responses to both.
Correct, J6 was terrorism. Where the Biden DOJ lost the script was by imprisoning people who were just there, as opposed to stopping with those inciting violence and breaking into the Capitol. I guess that touched a nerve for Trump hence the blanket pardons.
20 years for J6 sounds fine, 20 years for burning up a few hundred thousand dollars in Teslas sounds fine. Both aren’t a means to an end and shouldn’t be defended.
To be clear, these actions certainly look to comply with a variety of definitions for domestic terrorism.
So when Kid Rock and other right wing celebs blew up and shot up walls of Budweiser beer a couple years ago, I am you called you them Terrorists right?
No, because I can tell the difference between dissimilar things when they are compared. The main differences that I assumed were obvious, is that they destroyed product that they owned on land that they owned. Stupid? Maybe. Pointless? Probably. Illegal? No. Regardless, the Teslas, nor the land they sit on are owned by your terrorist friends, so it’s kinda a lot different. Stupid? Probably Pointless? Probably. Illegal? A lot.
One is our gov’t institution and the other is private property.
I am glad to see MAGA admits that they think Elon Musk is a part of the Trump kingdom and not just a private citizen that got his property vandalized.
Cult members apparently can’t understand the difference.
“Not surprising given that the Trump administration is calling the peaceful protests “domestic terrorism””
Jonathan,
The recent events in Tigard sure don’t seem like “peaceful protests” to me (2 shootings)
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/crime/shots-fired-tesla-store-tigard/283-cec2f036-5097-448a-ae22-656fb2ccf957
Meanwhile, peaceful non destructive protests are happening.
https://bikeportland.org/2025/03/03/tesla-takedown-protest-draws-large-crowd-video-393030
The discussion seems to be if Trump is calling this kind of protest “domestic terrorism” or distinguishing between violent actions and peaceful ones.
Meanwhile, as always I appreciate the several links to interesting articles, and your brief descriptions of them.
Hadn’t considered it before seeing about the cop’s body camera, but really cars should just be required to have the dash cams that also film the driver so that footage would be available after a collision.
Driver facing cameras are a common feature of drive cam systems installed in commercial vehicles because fleet managers know that driver behavior is an important factor in “safety” (really risk management). These systems typically record events surrounding sudden acceleration/deceleration and flag them for review.
Jonathan, the title you chose for the Paris vote is more ‘click bait’ than informative in this case…if its pro or con anything it would be “pro vegetation” / trees and secondarily “pro pedestrian”**. If it were “anti-car” / “anti-driver” then there would be car traps or other offensive weapons. 😉 The effort is “rues-jardin” . ** “Ce vote nous conforte dans la volonté de continuer à partager l’espace public en faveur des piétons et à végétaliser Paris pour une ville toujours plus verte”, a réagi auprès de l’AFP Christophe Najdovski, adjoint à la maire de Paris en charge des espaces verts.” https://www.france24.com/fr/plan%C3%A8te/20250324-parisiens-votent-petit-nombre-faveur-rues-jardin-participation-faible-votation-citoyenne-anne-hidalgo-france-pietonne-vegetaliser-scrutin-paris
Re “Distracted cop”: Glad that some kind of charges are being filed against someone futzing with a touch-screen while driving. Baffling that we can’t stand up to the industries responsible for turning cars into distraction machines.
In this case it sounds like it was a police car, so… questions to the department about why they equip vehicles with systems that let drivers browse the Web and watch YouTube while driving seem appropriate.