In Roslindale, an angry driver is angry
Tim Murphy reports he was driving with his kids up Glendower Street in Roslindale around 2 p.m. yesterday when the guy behind him got horn-blowingly mad not just because he wouldn't speed up the street but because he then stopped for the stop sign at Kittredge.
For those unfamiliar with the street, Glendower is your basic Roslindale side street: Even though it's one way, it's still narrow enough that you could understand if the city banned parking on one side, but, of course, it doesn't, so even some veteran drivers proceed with caution up it for fear of taking out a mirror, or worse.
Murphy says his interaction with the guy didn't end at the stop sign. He says the guy caught up to his car at Washington Street and West Roxbury Parkway - so plenty of time for the guy to stew and steam - rolled down his window at the light, and yelled that he hoped Murphy and his kids "would fucking die!" As you can see, Murphy caught him in mid-exclamation.
Ad:
Comments
I am so glad I rarely drive in this city...
And walk to work every day. No road rage, and no T to deal with either. So. Glad.
Glendower Road
I live on Glendower Road and every time I pull out of my driveway I deal with cars trying to pass me as I'm pulling out and proceeding up the street. I drive in about 20-25 mph up the hill and cars behind me, I swear they're going to hit my bumper because they are so close and in such a hurry. Sometimes at night I see them traveling at speeds of 40 and 50 miles an hour up the street, especially motorcycles. We need a speed trap on this street 24/7 and just about everywhere else in the city. It would be great if Boston Police could respond to this.
Instant Speed Bump
Buy a 50 lb sack of flour and leave it out in the rain in the middle of the street.
>It would be great if Boston
>It would be great if Boston Police could respond to this.
Then phone your local station and complain, I'm not sure if Rozzie is patroled by the Hyde Park or West Roxbury Stations, but their phone numbers are here:
* http://bpdnews.com/districts/
Also phone 311 (it used to be the Mayor's Hotline):
* http://www.cityofboston.gov/311/default.asp
And also your neighborhood representative:
* http://www.cityofboston.gov/contact/default.aspx?ID=71
Yea, the police do selective enforcment all the time...
In areas where people complain. Although this is an area where people go through the stop sign, there are very few crashes here that I can recall off the top of my head.
Driveways in Roslindale
Heh, I feel your pain! If you are lucky enough to have a driveway in Rozzie, you can expect three or four cars to try to buzz past you as you try to maneuver out without hitting the cars parked to either side or directly opposite your driveway. Sometimes I have to pull in and out five or six times before I can get a clear shot on to the street. My street is narrow enough to be one way and parking restricted to one side, so of course it is instead two way with open parking on both sides. The best is when two cars are heading the opposite direction and there is no place for either to pull to the side even if they are inclined to yield to the other driver.
Yep...
What you said. On the rare occasions when I have to drive in Boston or the 'burbs around rush hour, I am amazed at the level of anger right below the surface of so many car commuters. I see it on my T commute as well, but T commuters are not wielding (poorly) one ton weapons.
Let me guess, he was driving
Let me guess, he was driving a mid 2000s American-made SUV, possibly a Ford?
Before anyone says it, yes, there needs to be a website publicly shaming these asswipes.
Minivan
Men in minivans (without kids) are always Bad News.
If I had to pick one combination which almost guaranteed a complete asshat it would be the middle aged guy in the unmarked, beat-up minivan.
Me.
Surprised? When I'm not in my other car.
Internet shaming can be
Internet shaming can be cathartic but there is a lot wrong with it. We get Murphy's side but not that of the private citizen who did not ask to have his picture or story shared. Not journalism.
What right to privacy is
What right to privacy is there on a public road?
Not a privacy issue
There is no expectation of privacy in public. But, on the other hand, if you are going to publish someone's picture along with a specific allegation, you had better be able to back up your allegation with hard evidence.
I'm with you, Bob
The assumptions in these comments are eye-opening. I'm hoping the average jury pool in Mass has a better understanding of how to determine guilt or innocence.
This is disturbing, and frankly Adam, I think it's a bit much for you to perpetuate this sort of thing. Even when you quote the BPD reports, you're more likely to note "innocent until proven guilty, etc".
I can't help but wonder whether you would've posted this photo, Adam, if it weren't a picture of an old, white "get off my lawn" type....
They can be on my jury
The UHub comment board is not a court of law.
In everyday life, we make assumptions that we would not were we to be asked to serve on a jury.
I've heard no reason to think that the original FB poster was lying or made this up. To the contrary, several people have confirmed this guy's bad behavior. That's enough for these purposes.
Stop being so sanctimonious.
Very Trustworthy!!
Tim, the gentleman who originally posted, is a very trustworthy person. I have known him for quite a few years and worked closely with him. I know he is telling the truth about what happened!!
I think we got his side of the story
when we wished death upon children. What's wrong with you?
How do you know
How do you know that the guy in the photo wished death upon anyone?
Well...
Yeah, But...
That's Murphy's side of it. I'm not saying he isn't telling the truth but, as pointed out, it's only one side. The pictured driver may have something else to say.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Okay but that reasoning calls into question EVERYTHING
If your critique of this reporting is "Murphy could have lied," then a lot more than this report should be considered untrustworthy.
Not necessarily lied
But what if Murphy in fact was a bit less than saintly in this interaction? What if he yelled something to this guy first, leading to the reply? What if Murphy was driving 10 miles an hour down Glendower? What If Murphy cut the guy off at Poplar, leading to anger before the guy was even on the street, also giving cause to the tailgating? What if Murphy stayed at the stop sign for a few minutes, even though there was no traffic, because he was explaining to his kids why it is humid in the summer?
Judging by what others have written here, Murphy's story is probably true, but there could be missing parts to the story. A year ago a story made headlines worldwide, but key elements of the story were missing. If the whole story was right from the get go, things would have been viewed much differently. I think that asking if we are hearing the whole story is not that bad of a thing.
I don't know. I wasn't there. But neither were the rest of us.
If you think that Murphy
If you think that Murphy driving 10 mph down the street is grounds for a death threat, I think that says more about you than anything else...
and it's not good.
You're assuming a lot about me
And you know what they say about people making assumptions.
What I'm saying is this. If I were driving down Cornell and the car in front of me was going 10MPH, as opposed to, say, 20 or 25 (Murphy's claimed speed, which I can believe) and I needed to go somewhere, my blood pressure would go up a bit. To get to the level of wishing death on someone- that's way beyond what I would do. Heck, I'm bummed that Tsarnaev is getting the death penalty, and a lot of people around here would disagree.
But sure, miss my point, which is that we don't know the walrus' story.
Yeah, you are
What "something else" would make the claim about what the driver said untrue? That is, after all, what's being discussed here.
Seriously?
How about, "I was minding my business driving down the street, and a passenger in the car in front of me threw a brick out of the window, cracking my windshield. I caught up with him, and, at the moment the photo was snapped, was in the middle of saying, "Be careful, you crazy fuck, you're going to hurt someone."
That would make the claim untrue, for example.
So, because YOU can imagine all sorts of hypothetical...
... situations that MIGHT make a story untrue, one ought to assume the story IS untrue.
Oh, wait, Bob!
How about "...and then he opened his back door and released the CIRCUS PONIES, and they jumped up on my car and crapped all over the hood!" Sounds equally plausible.
Seriously, if you're gonna concoct an unlikely story, you could at least have some circus ponies in it.
Do You Have No Imagination?
I seriously hope I'm never on trial for murder and have you on the jury. You'd convict on the prosecution's first presentation, never minding the possibility of further evidence or testimony to the contrary.
As I said in so many words - but this time let me use a few more, so it's amazingly clear to even the dimmest among us - Murphy may be telling the absolute and unvarnished truth. Murphy has told us a story, and it is a compelling one. He has provided a photo that does not present the person in said photo in a flattering light. But there are literally (and I do mean literally) millions of things the guy in the photo could say, or another witness might say, or that video taken by another person might show, which could leave doubt. What in hell is so hard to understand about that? It's an amazingly simple concept.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Sul,
I'm rolling with the circus ponies. Little tiny ones.
Well...
I have to admit, I did enjoy the mental picture :-)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
That doesn't answer my question at all.
Come again?
I asked how you know that the guy said that.
Because
Someone took the time to teach us to read
Come again?
How is it that you are making the leap from "Some guy posting under the name Murphy accused the guy in the photo of wishing his family dead," to "The guy in the photo wished death upon a family.?"
I'm really not following your line of reasoning at all.
Why don't you track down the angry driver...
... and get back to us with his story?
Why should I do that?
I'm not particularly interested in his side of the story, I'm just calling out the people with no direct knowledge who are stating, confidently, as a matter of fact, that we have heard his side of the story or that things went down the way the original accuser said they did.
My position is very consistent: If you're going to be a citizen journalist, then follow basic journalistic rules and don't state as fact anything you don't know to be true.
Why you should do that
Because you clearly have a very great deal of time on your hands.
Come on, Bob, "citizen journalist"? You see things on uhub every day that are simply someone's account of what happened, and you don't go all Perry Mason about it. Star Market is applying for permits for outside seating! Why should you believe that one's true?
I suppose the only thing
I suppose the only thing wrong with me is I don't take an allegation that some dude posted on facebook as fact. Neither should you.
So says Mr. Murphy
any audio video or independent witness to back the claim up? ANYBODY with a grudge, or just a troll, can go online and make claims regarding a posted picture of some individual.
Read below
This guy is apparently well known in the area, and has harassed people before.
What I don't understand is this: if he appeared to be "half in the bag already" then why did the victim not call the cops and report him as an impaired driver?
But we don't have his name
That could be ANY walrus.
This Roslindale walrus...
... is not me. ;-)
But ...
Are you the Egg Man?
Very ....
... possibly -- if cooking huevos rancheras for our family's Saturday breakfast on a weekly basis counts.
Aggressive Driving
Is an arrestable offense in Massachusetts. Well, technically it's "negligent operation of a motor vehicle." If this guy were picked up for this (sure a ticket is more likely, but humor me), his picture and name would be available to all, and it would be "news." While I commend you for not actually victim blaming, it's more than fair to report on this.
I did hesitate before posting the photo
Because, yes, we have only one side of the story (if the gentleman in question does see this and wishes to respond, I will give him equal space). However, it's hard to interpret that look on his face as anything but anger.
As for taking a photo of a private person, he was on a public road, not a place where you have an expectation of privacy.
Hmm
Is this site accessible through Web TV?
Not cool
Given that we've only heard one side of the story, there's a very high probability that some key facts have been omitted. Maybe our hero Tim flipped him the bird at one point; maybe he cut him off - we don't know. And while your offer for the gentleman in the photo to have rebuttal space is charming, it's also quite egotistical to presume that somebody is going to come across this story on a website that's ranked number 90,000 in the U.S.
Putting up this photo, which is clearly intended to mock, is pure juvenile stuff.
You're putting a lot of faith in the original report
You have UH commenters believing anything they heard someone say on the Internet, destroying someone's name based on that belief, and appearing baffled when the un-American weakness in their reasoning is pointed out by other commenters.
I think UH should always try to lead by example, not feed commenters who'd fail a Civics class.
If you're out in public, all
If you're out in public, all is fair game for photos and stories, as far as I'm aware, in a news environment. There is no expectation of privacy for being an a%$-hole. Now, if his photo was to be used for advertising a new kind of toilet paper or something (i.e. aforesaid asswipes), then you have to get permission. If my understanding is incorrect, happy to be corrected.
How do you know what really happened?
You have only one side. Because he 'looks like an asshole'?
Yeah, I get it...
but I think it be of bad form (i.e. rude) to snap a persons photo without their permission. The guy took his photo to publicly shame him in a Facebook post. His prerogative, yes, but what is the point? If the guy is a regular nuisance, get the make and model of his car and plate and call the cops. And this was not in a "news environment"; some guy allegedly was acting like a moron and the object of his attack snapped his photo.
Like those fine folks that take pictures of probably mentally ill people in various states of undress, who are shopping in Wal-Mart, to post them on the web. Nothing illegal but so not cool.
Sort of disappointed that the guy's mug is appearing in UHub.
You are ignoring the fact...
... that other neighborhood residents, having seen the photo, corroborate the fact that this is an angry, impatient and dangerous driver.
Right...
and as I said in my post, then call the frigging police on the guy. Cripes I run into so many folks that will complain but are reluctant to do anything when they see something disagreeable going down. Myself included. Call the bloody cops.
People said they made multiple calls...
... in connection with the school incident, to no avail. I don't think calling the police would do much good in a case like this.
Publicly shaming him is doing
Publicly shaming him is doing something. The cops aren't gonna do anything. You can run some over and drive away and the cops still won't do anything.
The frigging police
Don't give a tinker's damn about stuff like this.
Nasty People on the Road
I think that many of the people complaining about the posting of this ahole's picture are the type of people who do the same stuff this guy does.
Nope
The people complaining have probably had something they did or said twisted around.
For example, I'm willing to bet the Suldog would never even honk his horn unless it is an emergency. Myself, I have this odd rule of allowing myself one honk a day for silly things like not going when the light's been green for 10 seconds, and beyond that it would be only if a collision is eminent. Yelling at a guy with his kids in the car? Hey, part of the anonymity of being in a car comes from not dealing with someone face to face. So yes, drivers can be assholes, but it takes a special person, or as the kind of defenders will point out a special circumstance, for a driver to actually yell at another driver.
Thank You
The number of times I've used my horn in the past year could probably be counted on the fingers of one hand. The number of times I've used it in anger is almost nil for my lifetime. I don't even like it if someone honks the horn because they're too lazy to get out of their car to go to the door when they're picking someone up.
I'm no saint. I've had folks honk at ME, for what I considered no good reason, and I've reacted with less than kind words. That's the thing, though. I figure if beeping gets me riled enough to spout invective, then what good will it do if I beep at someone else? So I save it for alerting someone in danger or once in a great while a very slight tap if someone is texting or otherwise occupied at a light that turned green a while back (and I wish I had some other means at my disposal to signal such a driver.)
Anyway, this is way off the path of the conversation at hand. I just wanted to let Waquiot know the truth was hit upon, although how it happened I'm not quite sure :-)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogsot.com
And which finger are you using?
I've also used that finger to express my displeasure with a driver, but that would be the worst of it.
To the main point, I was given a book about the demise of the old Winnipeg Jets written by someone opposed to corporate giveaways. They somehow got the WORST photo of the team owner, probably mid-vowel. That's the power of getting the photo just at the right time.
Wow
So Mark K is as charming face to face as he is on here, huh?
Hokay ...
Maybe let's only go after what people say, not make up stuff.
Sorry Adam
I just assumed that he already posted something that you had to delete.
In my defense ;-)
sarcasm
You don't see me driving distracted by kids in the car or a cell phone in my hand taking pictures of people do you?
If Mr. Murphy had a little more mental bandwidth allocated towards the primary activity of driving, he might be able to scan his surroundings to anticipate movements of everything ahead of him and drive the speed limit in broad daylight. Some people have places to go and things to do other than crawl along and then post about it to Facebook.
/sarcasm
Just a reminder
Speed limits are a MAXIMUM speed, not a minimum.
You are also NOT ENTITLED to have those in front of you drive at the speed limit.
I'm with you
Don't let your liberties infringe on my liberties. There seems to be but one modus operundi around here, "Me First, it's all about Me". And if I can take advantage of the courteous or thoughtful motorist I will. Remember, It's all about me!
Not quite sure what you are saying here
Not sure if you are saying that aggro motorists are selfish or slower motorists and cyclists are.
It does not infringe on your liberties if the person in front of you refuses to break the law for your convenience, and it does not infringe on your liberties if the person in front of you is obeying the law and you have to obey it too.
I was doing the speed limit.
I was doing 25 up that street. When I came to a stop he started beeping the horn and screaming out HIS window. I then proceeded on Beech street where he attempted to pass me but realizing a car was coming the other way backed off. When I got to the intersection at Wash and the Parkway HE pulled up to me and started screaming obscenities at me. That is when I grabbed my phone and took the picture.
The limit was probably 30 posted as 25
unless a school zone. I was just joking for the sake of joking and really can't get worked up about this issue one way or another. I don't get worked up driving. Having a convertible helps with that a lot. People expect me to represent every driver so I was compelled to use what I could against you to defend the man whose unflattering picture you took.
This is some good quality
This is some good quality public shaming. Unfortunately that is the only tool we have against dangerous maniacs because our government has given them all a license to operate a deadly weapon and they don't take away said license or weapon even after people prove they are a threat to society.
they'll take it away fast...
If you're not LE.
Every day as a cyclist...
People complain about law-breaking cyclists, but it's just as hard to be a law-abiding one. Same goes for driving. Can't win with people who are enraged to the point of being irrational. It's scary that these people are piloting huge, speeding hunks of metal around the city.
Had a driver this morning honk/yell/curse becuase I was apparently impeding his ability to race to a stop behind a line of traffic stopped at a light. He floored it to swerve around, dove between lanes, and practically rear-ended the cars just to prove his point. Probably the same sort of specimen bemoaning high gas prices when they drive ridiculous and waste fuel.
I can at least take solace in the fact that they must not be very happy people to lose control so easily.
speeding to a line of stopped cars
What is up with that? See it all the time. It can't be unique to Massachusetts, but it seems there must be some perverse incentive to do as it happens so often.
Can't see beyond their own nose
Or in this case I say they can't see beyond their own hood ornament.
This is unique to Massachusetts, in my experience
I haven't been anywhere else in the country where people act like this.
Not New York, Not DC, not in the South, not in the West.
Not really
In the most egregious example in my memory of a driver doing this, she was using NH plates.
OK, fine.
Greater Boston metro?
Seen it in Cambridge
Giant truck, on my ass IN THE BIKE LANE when I was stopped at a light with a "no turn on red" sign. He wanted to turn right and was honking at me and revving the engine.
When I read off the plate number and state to the detail cop lurking around the corner at a sewer line dig (he requested it to start writing the ticket) he rolled his eyes. The cop then told me to go through the red (which makes it legal) - so he could catch the guy making an illegal right on red, I presume.
"Detail cop"
All he wants to do is drink coffee and talk to the contractors, while getting paid, what 2x regular?
And now he has to deal with people asking him to enforce traffic laws? Leave him alone. His job is hard enough as it is.
I didn't ask anything
He heard the honking an revving, and actually decided to have a little fun.
Probably a lot more fun and a better story than spending the day entirely in hole-staring mode.
When driving, I frequently
When driving, I frequently get honked at for NOT driving in the bike lane. There are way too many idiots behind the wheel. And you can't blame it all on Massholes. I see plenty of NJ and NY plates around here that drive like aggressive morons. The block of Comm. Ave. after you take a right off of the Mass. Ave. bridge is the worst. Double-parking in the bike lane seems standard, and if there isn't someone parked there, there is someone trying to pass you by on the right by driving in the bike lane. And yielding for pedestrians or cyclists crossing before the on-ramp for Soldier's Field Road... ha! Daily honked at for stopping for people in the crosswalk. It's pathetic.
Well, duh
How am I supposed to tweet about how I was just stuck behind a dumbass slow biker if I don't race up to a red light so I have time to pull out my phone without needing to type one-handed while I drive?
Boston taxis are the worst offenders
Maybe if Uber cars were clearly identifiable and zoomed up to red lights all the time I'd hate them too but the first is definitely not the case and I'd be very surprised if the the second were as well. So go Uber, eff you taxis.
Ubers are just as bad
But they're harder to spot. You can often tell UberX from the phone mount and passengers in the back. The Uber Blacks and SUVs tend to be pretty distinctive looking and have livery plates. Don't trust anyone who is being paid to drive in this city.
Speeding to red lights hasn't
Speeding to red lights hasn't been an issue for me with livery, Uber or otherwise, and I see a lot of livery in the areas I frequent. I'll try to look out for UberX clues but I'm skeptical that they're doing it anywhere near the rate that taxis do.
Taxis are paid to do that
The taxi tariff rewards cab drivers for zooming up to red lights. You're paid X per yard traveled, plus Y per second when the cab is not in motion.
So, if you are 200 yards from a traffic light, and you just coast up to it like a sane driver, arriving as it turns green, you get paid for 200 yards worth of travel. But if you race up to it and slam on the brakes, you get paid for the 200 yards plus the 10 seconds of wait time. Over the course of a week, it adds up.
Thanks for explaining that
I just thought there was no way to drive a crown vic without lurching.
They're playing the meter.
Yet another reason to take Uber instead.
YUP
I stop at all red lights while on my bike. (Car too for that matter.) When I say stop I mean I don't move until the light turns green and I follow the No Turns signs. I won't ride with a crosswalk sign either.
This infuriates people to no end.
I've had more people scream and yell at me for NOT running the light so they could make the illegal turn on red then I ever had for me for running lights back when I used to do that.
It would be refreshing to have people drop the whole "Cyclists need to follow the law" shit and just admit the only thing they care about is how fast they can go. I dare anyone to find a proponent of "Cyclists need to the follow the law" who also doesn't speed in their car and ignore just about any traffic sign they find slightly inconvenient.
Critical Mass "To Rule"
Did you hear about the recent critical mass ride in SFO where the entire point was to follow all the rules to the letter? This is something I suggested would be a great idea a long time ago, but they actually pulled it off.
Hilarity ensued.
Wiggle protest
Not Critical Mass per se. SFO police were doing stop sign enforcement costing EVERYONE $240 for not stopping at stop signs. In CA and NY cyclists actually have to pay tickets or face having their driving licenses suspended, unlike Massachusetts. The fine is the same no matter the color of your skin or the type of vehicle you operate.
Protesters coordinated two events. I'm not sure how many enforcement events police coordinated, probably only a few more. The cyclists interfering with traffic with traffic flow was due to a problem in the law allowing cyclists to use the whole travel lane and not keep to the right ;-). Fixing that would have fixed the blockade!
Story here:
http://district5diary.blogspot.com/2015/08/walking-back-crackdown-on-cyc...
Cyclists can't stay to the right
Because drivers can't seem to understand when they don't have enough room to pass.
It really is that simple.
Another reminder: people have rights, not vehicles. Being in a car gives you no special rights to that lane space. The cyclist owns it, too, and can use it if necessary.
They could have made two lanes but were assh*les
The protest allowed cyclists to block the single travel lane rather than keeping right allowing both a motor vehicle and a cyclist to stop and then proceed at the stop sign (effectively two lanes), halving the delay for everyone. Instead, cyclists were being selfish and inconsiderate of everyone by taking up the whole lane so everyone behind them had to wait longer. That is my point. I guess having the right to be an assh*le is your's.
Or
Sure, unless the car decides to instantly turn right, killing the cyclist and then driving away in blissful obliviousness.
Oh horrors!
Someone driving a car might *gasp* have to wait their turn! (ominous music)
Oh horrors!
Somebody on a bike might *gasp* have to deal with a car passing them! (equally ominous music).
I know Swirlly, you won't be satified until everyone on the street is forced to do less than ten miles an hour.
Not the point
A cyclist moving to the right is a COURTESY not a REQUIREMENT because the safe passing margin is 3', the door zone is 3', oncoming traffic exists, and there isn't always enough room to move over.
Having a car does not make you special and entitled to endanger other road users - be they oncoming drivers or legal users of the roadways.
Seriously - turn in your license and stop driving if you can't deal with being a law abiding citizen.
With all due respect
perhaps you should stop accusing people who make LEGITIMATE points of not being law abiding drivers. Or you could continue to slander people whose driving history you know nothing about with snarky comments that have nothing to do with their postings. And having a 5 mph cyclist blocking 20 mph traffic on a wide street just because the believe they're entitled to "take the lane" is not advocating "equal responsibility."
For the record, I seldom drive in Downtown Boston - use a combination of T and walking instead. And, in the 37+ years I've been a licensed driver, I've driven approximately 580,000 miles (about 65% highway - 35% city/local). In that time, I've had two crashes (neither was my fault) and exactly one traffic ticket (stupid mistake I owned up to). If that record is your idea of a driver who should turn in their license, then perhaps you should reevaluate your opinions about drivers.
Give this guy a break
If Murphy had taken the time to get to know his neighbors, none of this would have happened.
Well if the Boston Police
Well if the Boston Police would do their job and actually enforce stop signs (you know, every driver has to come to a stop at the stop sign) then there wouldn't be this attitude in Boston that stop signs are optional and you can just slow down a little to see if you will ruin your car if you keep going, otherwise, they run right through the stop sign. Cops never enforce it, they are happy to take our tax money but do their job? They will pick and choose what to do.
First photo when loading UniHub...
and I see this ! YIKES!
All I can hear coming out of that hole is:
"DUH, DUH DUH DUH, DUH, UM,
DUH, DUH, DUH.
DUH-DUH, DUH-DUH DADA-DUH!"
Those streets are bad
Glendower and Beech are both treated like 203 or HP Ave when they are in fact residential streets. It's a weird bit of traffic design how there are few major roads connecting 'south' Roslindale over to Hyde Park. We need seasonal speed bumps or something in a lot of places.
Yeah, it's the "traffic design"
That certainly forced this guy to fly off the handle.
I never use Glendower as a cut through
I use Cornell.
That said, not stopping at Glendower and Kittredge just seems like a motor-vehicle accident waiting to happen, to say the least. I mean, there is often only one traffic lane on Kittredge since parking is theoretically allowed on both sides.
But then again, when one is a self-absorbed asshat, I guess these things don't matter.
This guy
Boston seems have to have a disproportionate number of "this guy. "
I've moved to SF, and, homeless people with mental illness aside, I haven't seen anyone act like this in months. But in Boston it's practically a daily occurrence.
There are many nice things about Boston, but I don't miss that crap one bit (or the weather).
Selective perception?
I've spent some time in sf, and can bring to mind several occasions where people acted just like this. Also will never forget seeing a vette scream off the 101 and cut left in front of traffic onto market like he was playing GTA.
Was he shouting profanities at you?
Probably not.
I'm sorry, but this behavior is worse in Boston and metro than anywhere else in the country.
Yes, there are bad, aggressive drivers in SF just like everywhere, but it's not the same. The degree of driving a-hole behavior is at least 10-fold higher in Boston.
Because...
It's a lot easier to shout profanities when traffic is completely stopped. When someone's moving at "screaming" speeds, how would you even know?
No you're not.
Others who have driven elsewhere disagree with you. Myself, I doubt anyone really has the data points to make such a statement. Certainly I don't think you have extensive driving experience everywhere else in the country -- that would be impossible, wouldn't it?
Name another city where the drivers are so bad...
...that the state ALLOWS people to drive on the shoulder.
Seriously.
Again. You can tell yourself otherwise, but the aggressiveness and rudeness of Boston drivers is famous. For a reason.
Seriously?
Just sticking to cities Boston-sized or bigger that I've done lots of driving in: Philly, Chicago and of course New York for aggressiveness. San Francisco/Bay and Miami for cluelessness. Denver for over-entitledness.
But I thought - I wonder what happens if I google "why are drivers" "so bad" [list of US cities Boston-sized or larger]
Well, here it is. Looks like Boston has lots of company!
(Btw, if you do this search while logged into Google or with cookies allowed, it's going to weight the search towards the region your browser is in (most of us = Boston, natch). So if you want to see how truly universal complaining about drivers is, adjust your privacy settings accordingly.
Ridiculous statement
I've encountered people like 'this guy' (who is ALLEGED to have behaved obnoxiously, if not illegally) all over. I know S.F. pretty well, and the Bay Area; there are PLENTY of assholes on and off the roads. Ditto L.A. And NYC? Please, no comment; and I'm a native NYer. And it's not even just an urban big city thing, I've experienced plenty of examples of asinine behavior on and off the roads in rural areas, where people are allegedly more 'laidback' than city people. IMO suburban driving, as far as rudeness, is the worse.
These guys are everywhere
Although a dying breed, he looks like all those guys I used to see in East Boston and Revere who were always "out on disability", yet seemed perfectly active congregating with their buddies (also "out on disability") and their Herald and their lottery tickets.
This guy is a known bully
This is my neighborhood and i've had a run in with him. Ironically, i don't think he lives around here - probably just uses glendower to jump from hyde park ave to washington (common shortcut). But he never stops at that stop, nor at the one at Beech. When my daughter was going to the Bates k-6, this guy would honk and yell at the kids ( and parents) crossing the street to get to school. He nearly ran into me one day and I smacked his hood with my open hand. He got out of his ( running!) vehicle in the middle of the street and threatened to kill me.
I laughed in his face, and he backed down after blustering some more. I and several other parents reported his plate to the police but nothing ever came of it.
The joke's on this guy
The only thing which is actually going to carry out its threat to kill someone is this guy's own cardiovascular system.
He does look a tad unhealthy.
And he's got the start of a real J.P. Morgan nose.
I and several other parents
Color me shocked.
True dat
I've run into this fat jerk too. Whatever Murphy said, it happened. This creep swears at children. He is an appropriate target for public shaming.
OK, whatever "Sock Puppet" if that is your real name...
Carty said this guy is a peach and misunderstood, and we're all jumping to conclusions on a JUMP... to conCLUsions mat...
Would you provide a link?
> Carty said this guy is a peach
I can't find the post you are referring to. All I see is a post saying we have no right to suspect that the story is true without getting the angry guy's side of the story.
But I too live in the neighborhood. And I have seen angry, impatient guys of just this sort. So, I don't find the story improbable at all.
Are you questioning my integrity
Of course it's my name. Just ask my brother Hand.
Glendower used to be a 2-way
Glendower used to be a 2-way street but was changed to one-way a decade or so ago give or take. It used to be like playing tetris on the street with cars pulling over then back out to maneuver past each other.
And I can't say I'm surprised by this. Glendower is a heavily-trafficked cut-through and in the area too many motorists act like they're on a highway rather than a residential street. It's galling to see the lack of consideration for residents' safety by these people, many of whom live in the area too! I've said it before but the city needs to get serious about traffic calming measures not only downtown but in the neighborhoods.
Organize?
There are now a number of side streets in Jamaica Plain that have speed bumps, which I think got there because residents organized and complained, in your basic vociferous JP way, to the city.
On it ;-)
On it ;-)
As to the JP ones, they were put in a while back, the ones pond-side, as a pilot and then the city decided they didn't like them. But they've remained there. Somerville does seasonal speed humps that they take up in the winter so plows don't hit them. No reason Boston cannot do that as well in some areas, though that's only one measure of many possible traffic calming options. Lot of people are organizing and working on this issue, more to come.
McCarthy
I bet Councillor McCarthy would have feedback on this given his DPW background.
Some of the ones in JP were citizen installed I believe, but later replaced with city approved ones, maybe on Sheridan St?
Paul Gore too.
Fun to bike over.
I remember
when the JP ones were put in - the Hyde Sq area, specifically. They're on Mozart, Wyman, and Forbes. And the then Neighborhood Liaison pointed out during a community meeting that these speed bumps met DPW standards vs those installed in Cambridge. And I remember people elsewhere in JP were unhappy that these were installed first.
I don't recall the City having a complaint about the speed bumps, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.
JP Pilot study
Yes, the JP ones around Hyde Square were part of a pilot that was basically the work of one or two very persistent residents. I live on one such street. It works great.
I don't think that the pilot was fully evaluated. However, I talked to some traffic people in the city who said the numbers didn't show a significant reduction in the median speed, thus the humps didn't work.
I believe that's a flawed measure, at least for the roads like the neighborhood JP ones. What they do on those streets is eliminate the infrequent high speed data points. Those are the really scary ones if you live there.
One other streets, you likely will see a drop in median speeds. Getting down to 20-25mph makes a huge difference for everyone's safety. Also note speed bumps are just one limited kind of traffic calming.
Always the DIY solution
I live in one of those "cut through" neighborhoods and a group of folks at a cookout were conspiring to take up a collection to get some of these things, available from Uline:
And just what gives you
and your neighbors the legal authority to place obstructions on a public street?
Dear Roadfool
We aren't talking about public streets. The words "private way" appear below the street name on every sign.
Hey, don't let the cocktail party musings of people sick of drivers like you behaving irresponsibly behind the wheel because CAR GO FAST and neighborhoods are just in their way bother you, though. It seemed a bit more civilized than going Garp on the next jerk to run the stop signs.
I like you
I really do - I think you have a lot of valid points, when you're not angry.
You did not say this:
in your previous post.
Uncool Swirls
I thought the same thing roadman did when I read that post in the original form - it was not at all clear that you were talking about a private way. Instead of mea culp'ing you were wicked rude to him and without noting it went back and edited your coment to make the context clearer. Not cool.
Pro Tip
Try driving the speed limit and having some respect for residential streets and you needn't worry about it.
Pro Tip? On what, bad debate deflection techniques?
Neither roadman nor I advocated driving over the speed limit. He asked if you were putting an obstacle in a public road - in response you were nasty, insulting *and* changed your statement so it looked like he wasn't reading it well. I said I found the original post unclear as well, and now you're sniping at me and implying I'm motivated by...what, guilt as a secret speeder or something?
Surely it's not that difficult to admit error every once in a while? Especially on so minor an issue as unclear grammar. (if nothing else, my years as a
subjectstudent at the Institvte taught me not to double down on mistakes, but own them and move past promptly).(Ftr, I'm a big stickler about limits on residential roads and even a scold when I see speedsters on my street. Can't say I've never fantasized about putting in a speed bump or two.)
If through traffic is using
your streets, then they legally are not "private ways", even if they are signed as such.
But, but
I thought swirly lived in a super dense city, not in a leafy suburb on a private way
Glendower Street at Kittredge
Glendower Street at Kittredge .
Please ....
...explain what we are seeing in this picture. ;-)
Many moons ago , house at
Many moons ago , house at that corner, 48 Chevy in driveway. Long live the Coug , and the legend of the Coug !
Looks like some sort of exotic tower...
... on or behind the car.
Internet picture of '48,
Internet picture of '48, didnt have camera back then , best i could do. Car was from Chelsea Chevrolet if that is any help. '' exotic tower '' probably a gazebo ...........
That's a great pic
Forget about the story for a sec - that's a great pic. Talk about a picture saying a thousand words.
This guy looks exactly like
This guy looks exactly like an angry road rage fiend. So classic.
The Phantom Stop Sign
Whenever I drive down Kittredge from Beech St. I'm always amazed how many people turning left from Glendower seem to feel like that particular stop sign doesn't exist. In fact, they seem to rely on the fact that it should exist for traffic on Kittredge so they can turn without stopping.
Yes indeed.
My sons attended the Bates and I would park around the corner on Kittredge to pick them up some days. You pretty much had to slow down and drive defensively to make sure you weren't hit by the stop sign running drivers on Glendower. And it's even worse when school lets out and there is a backup of school buses on the streets. But at least no one's going really fast.
There are a few phantom stop signs in Beacon Hill also
Corner of Dern and Hancock. Corner of Hancock and Mount Vernon. Corner of Mount Vernon and Walnut (I wonder if I will get hit from behind for stopping at that sign). Corner of Mount Vernon and Mugar Way. Police could meet a decent size quota on a 4 hour shift at any of these locations. They wouldn't even need to hide. Could hold up giant signs say "Stop or Ticket" and people would still run the signs.
Mount Vernon and Joy
That's the one where I see the most offenders, usually going westbound on Mt. Vernon and then trying to turn onto Joy. I bet most of them are State House electeds and workers on their way out of the garage, so not a chance a ticket would stick.
One of them is iffy
Hancock is one way, arriving at a T intersection into Mount Vernon. At the T, you can turn left into the State House, if you have rights to be in there and the police raise the barricade. Or you can turn right onto one-way Mount Vernon. There's almost no pedestrian traffic. I've never understood why there's a stop sign there.
Most stop signs in local communities exist
not because there is a real need to control the assignment of right of way at a given location, but because people have decided that it's necessary to slow traffic down for no good reason. Our Great and General Court didn't exactly help matters in the mid 1980s by allowing cities and towns to install stop signs on their streets without approval from the state DOT - see Chapter 689 of the Acts of 1986 (while such signs still have to conform to MUTCD requirements and guidance, local cities and towns tend to conveniently ignore that requirement).
When drivers encounter locations where stop signs are placed for no legitimate reason, they tend to start disregarding stop signs at all locations. Same goes for speed limits that are set unrealistically low in the name of "safety".
Stop signs for no good reason
That's an interesting note about Chapter 689 - I would have imagined that the municipalities would have had that permission much earlier.
From my experience in other jurisdictions, I am often surprised at how few stop signs there are in Massachusetts. In many instances (non-thickly settled areas where there are few residences) I think this is generally a good thing). In lots of other jurisdictions, and particularly in New York, they are much more common and frequent - particularly in residential areas.
With respect to the "no good reason", I think that that in most cases at the municipal level, the given reason is that people are flying down residential streets on which many small children live (in significant part to avoid bottlenecks on the main thoroughfares (thanks, Waze!)). As the parent of a two year old, I have to say (regrettably, because I drive very slowly on said roads) that's a good enough reason for me. As a matter of fact, I'm considering petitioning either for a stop sign and/or other traffic calming measures on my street in a suburb west of town for this very reason - even though the street has been milled up for a month (with raised structures as a result) people are still doing 40-45 down it because it parallels a main thoroughfare for a short distance (and let's people avoid 1 fricken light). I would prefer this to enforcement because it is omnipresent, but if I don't get anywhere, I'm dropping a dime to a couple of the cops that I know in town (and who think my 2 year old is really cute).
Pages