The debate rages on about the city's bicyclists and whether or not they should be held responsible, en masse, for the few bad apples who blow through red lights and occasionally kill pedestrians. Following the deadly collision at Castro and Market in which an out-of-control cyclist plowed into the crosswalk and ultimately caused the death of an elderly man, the Chronicle publishes an editorial today calling on the city to stop being so accommodating to the Bicycle Coalition and start doing more to "hold them accountable for rude, reckless and sometimes dangerous behavior."
Surprisingly, most of the comments already in the thread on the editorial are mostly civil and balanced and not coming from SF Gate's usual pool of shrill, outer-Bay Area curmudgeons with too much time on their hands and a surplus of rage.
Meanwhile, District 5 Diary uses this as an opportunity to recount all the recent issues with cycling in the city and the various accommodations being given cyclists under the headline "The Downside of Progressivism in SF."
The issue seems to be a lack of enforcement, however when the cops start busting bicyclists for rolling through stop signs in relatively quiet intersections (especially when they do the same thing), that gets up the ire on the cycling side of things. What do you do to punish the bad actors who speed down hills and don't stop where they should? Probably the same thing we do to auto drivers who do the same thing. But as was the case in last year's deadly bicycle accident that claimed the life of a tourist, the cyclist didn't end up thrown in the clink for vehicular homicide he got off with three years probation and no jail time. Betcha the sentencing won't be quite as lenient in this case, especially when the offending cyclist took to the internet to admit how much he was at fault before figuring out that the guy died.