> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# john H. Whitehead That Rutherford Guy Bikers are bothersome
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/john-h-whitehead-send-comments-to-editor-smdp-com-that-rutherford-guy-bikers-are-bothersome-editor/
- Published: 2007-07-30T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-25T00:24:58.000Z
- Author: Guest Author
- Tags: Opinion, Promenade, #archive-import

*By Alex Fieglein Santa Monica*

I am in total agreement with most motorists in that these “Critical Mass” biker gang members (I know they are not a gang but they sure do act like one, all the way down to threatening drivers and passers-by who challenge them — I have been one of those threatened) are not quite making their point correctly. If their goal is to get the attention of the powers-that-be, then why not do it in such a way that demonstrates their willingness to abide by traffic laws and general public safety guidelines. I live just off of the Third Street Promenade and encounter these hooligans once a month as they weave in and out of cars, up onto sidewalks forcing pedestrians to literally jump out of the way, screaming and yelling and generally causing commotion and terrifying some drivers. Riding on sidewalks is illegal, changing lanes without signaling is illegal, and running stop signs and stop lights is illegal, and riding on Wilshire Boulevard is… well, just plain stupid and dangerous.

And another point, I have often encountered cyclists that blast right through the four-way stop sign at the intersection of Third Street and California Avenue. Question: If I reach the stop sign first, come to a full and complete stop and then proceed and a cyclist runs through a stop sign and runs into the side of my car, is that cyclist not liable for any damage he or she’s head and bike does to my car? After all, cyclists are required to come to a full and complete stop and obey all traffic signs much the same as a car does. Even further, if a cyclist comes blasting across Wilshire at one of the PEDESTRIAN crosswalks, and heaven forbid, I hit them, then I would be taking that person to court to repair any damages they had done to my car, even if the accident leaves them severely injured. The very word “Pedestrian” means those traveling on FOOT; WALKING! You are required to walk your bike across those crosswalks, not ride across recklessly and dangerously.

I hope the day never comes when someone runs into me, but the bottom line is, if you are asking for the city to make accommodations for cyclists in the form of better bike lanes and pedestrian-restricted paths, which in turn is asking taxpayers to make such accommodations, shouldn’t you show us all that you are responsible enough to be on the road? As far as I am concerned, I will not vote for a fraction of a cent increase in taxes for ANYTHING bicycle related until I see that it will not just put more cyclists on the road that do no obey traffic laws.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 30, 2007.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/073007.pdf?ref=smdp.com)