Hey, there! Log in / Register
In Hyde Park, car crashes into house; in Roslindale, car goes up in flames
By adamg on Sat, 05/12/2018 - 10:02pm
Chris Dunn shows us the scene on Metropolitan Avenue in Hyde Park around 7:30 p.m. Around the same time, on the other side of the train tracks, in Roslindale, a car went up in flames on Cornell Street between Poplar and Kittredge.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
How does this happen?
How does this happen?
Compare and contrast
The comment section here with the Hubway on Storrow post. Faux outrage and 100+ comments when it's a cyclist doing something, crickets when it's yet another motor vehicle crashing into a stationary object.
Houses need to take their
Houses need to take their headphones off. If you are a house, you've got to understand that cars are gonna hit you, right Mayor Walsh?
And how many of those comments are yours
The difference between cyclists and drivers is that drivers can see the errors of other drivers. The car hit the house. There is an accepted assumption that poor driving is to blame. Meanwhile, cyclists deflect blame for their actions at every turn.
Now you’ll get the comment count you want. You’re welcome.
The real questions
Was the house wearing a helmet? How about high visability siding?
Or was there a daycare driveway through there at sometime in the past and the driver just couldn't adjust?
You want to play like that?
Perhaps the driver swerved to miss a cyclist who blew a red light?
A drivers speeds into a house
A drivers speeds into a house and you blame cyclists. Your brain is diseased.
He wasn’t aiming for the house
He was trying to avoid the cyclist. Have you lost the ability to read.
Maybe a car ran a red light that caused the car to swerve
Who knows really. We do know that one of those fantasy scenarios outrages you way more.
Several maybe?
I was a little late to that thread but it was already pretty high before I arrived.
You still seem hung up on this idea that I don't acknowledge the reckless behavior of some cyclists or think it's ok to break the laws of the road. Or maybe you're speaking to the larger cycling community? If so I can agree there but come on, stop the holier than thou act about motorists, they are just as bad.
And sure now maybe this thread will expand but it won't be about the car crashing into that building I bet!
Holier than thou?
That would be if one does not admit one is a sinner. Good motorists admit their faults, even if they don’t change their ways.
By the way, you’ve seen how comment counts are driven, right?
Yes
Yes you are.
You seem to be the one with the ready excuse for anything that is status quo, critical thinking be damned.
Particularly "holier than thou" when it comes to being a religious apologist ... but in this case, its kind of like driving everywhere is your religion.
Someone’s trolling
Which is good, because someone wants a lot of comments associated with this article for some reason.
But I’ll just note that you drive to work far more often than I do, and you’re probably in denial about your driving habits. So, which religion are you?
Admitting fault but not changing ways?
So getting caught for speeding and doing it again? That doesn't sound like a good motorist to me.
We just got over 10 comments now! 1/10th of the way there!
The key is
Hijacking the comments and making it about bicyclists. Since the main article is about a car crash without injuries and a separate car fire, I don’t see this getting above 30 comments.
Cyclists and motorists are just as bad at scofflaw behavior
Yet only one of the two groups kills 30,000 people a year.
Almost like piloting a deadly piece of heavy equipment in an inappropriate way kills people far more often or something?
The difference between
The difference between cyclists and drivers is that drivers kill 35,000 people in this country every year. You get more mad about a cyclist running a red light than you do 35,000 annual deaths caused by drivers and that is disgusting and disturbing.
No no no you misunderstand his/hers point!
Its not that they are mad about cyclists running red lights, they are mad about cyclists running red lights and thinking the laws don't apply to them!! But if its a motorists running reds or speeding, well they are of course in no way saying they are above the law. Nope not one bit at all.
I think we might be up to 20 comments so far, still talking about bikes and red herrings!
Today I saw …
A motorist run a red light at the new crosswalk at Riverway and Route 9 (the Gateway or whatever they are calling that). Just blew right through it. Luckily there wasn't anyone on that side of the crosswalk when it happened.
If there had been, there'd have been a seriously injured or dead pedestrian or cyclist.
How often does a law-breaking cyclist kill a pedestrian? Basically never? My favorite story … a few months ago I was getting drinks with a friend and he said "you'll never guess what I just saw … a bicycle pedestrian crash."
Apparently a cyclist came up the right side of stopped traffic at 3rd Street and Broadway in Kendall and a pedestrian stepped off the curb. The cyclist had the light green light so it was the pedestrian's "fault" but I think we can agree the cyclist in that situation should have been paying pretty good attention. I asked what happened. "Well, they both hit the ground, and then got up, brushed themselves up and started yelling at each other. After a few seconds they both gave up and walked away."
How often does a speeding car hit a pedestrian and the pedestrian gets up and walks away?
Careful...
It'd be fewer than 35,000 if only cyclists didn't run red lights.
Look, this has been fun
And I think both of us did a good job stirring up the pot, but here's some perspective on the comment count.
10 days ago, Adam reported that two men were murdered at the Heath Street projects. Do you know how many comments that article got? 18. My posting this puts the comment count on a story about a car hitting a house (though the photo does make it look like it hit the steps rather than the house proper) at 20. Again, no reported injuries. Do we want to talk about crickets now?
I get how the dynamics of comments to internet news stories work, which is why I avoid them except here (which you and basically all of the regular commenters can take as a compliment.) The silly lady riding a Hubway on Storrow Drive is fodder to comments, accusations, counter accusations, and the like. Meanwhile, how many different ways can one write "that's horrible" with things ranging from the truly bad (loss of life) to the annoying (a house in need of repair.) Does this mean we don't care that two people died, or that we care less about these dead men than we do about some lady on a bicycle? Honestly, I don't think so. I think you, me, Kinopio, Swirly, Ari, and anyone else who has or will comment on this story does in fact care more about a soon to be college grad gunned down before his life really began at the same time a father was taken from his daughters. But we don't have anything to say about it.
Someone drove into a house. Like I said at first, the odds are that he (or she, to be fair) was driving poorly, with the off chance that there was a medical situation or that they were avoiding some other hazard. But until you wrote what you wrote, I had no inkling of saying anything, because it made no sense. I tip my hat, because you drove the conversation. Well done.
Well theres moving goalposts
And then there's making a new one entirely out of straw.
If you can't understand the difference between the debates that come up here centered around vehicles/road safety and reporting on murders, I can't help you.
No goalposts being moved
That was a direct reply to the substance of your comment.
My point, since you seemed to have missed it, is that comment count has zero to do with how important an issue is. In fact, it often is in inverse proportion to the importance of the topic in the real world.
You saw an article on a couple of motor vehicle mishaps. You made it about cyclists. Who moved those goalposts, actually?
It was about road safety
That includes bikes and cars. And you know my original point wasn't about the proportion of importance to a comment threads count, it was "oh well what can you do" attitudes, or lack of even a comment, in threads about car transgressions compared to the faux-outrage comments about a fairly innocuous cyclist incident.
You conjuring about comment counts on posts about incidents of murder is moving the goalpost, connecting it back to road safety to make a cheap point is constructing it with straw.
Read your own comment
You asked us to contrast the one (yours being the second) comment about the car crash with the 100 (and growing) comments about someone riding a bike on Storrow Drive. You wrote it. How about owning what you wrote?
You wanted to compare comment count, and I put your comparison into a different context. If you didn’t want to make the comment section of this story about comment counts, you didn’t have to do it, but you did, so I did, too. I just kicked the ball through the goal posts you set up.
Compare and contrast
Faux outrage AND 100+ comments compared to crickets, I believe come up in the second sentence. I wanted to compare the number AND substance of comments on weekly events of cars crashing into things vs. cyclists existing on road.
Again, pretty clear what the differences are unless you are blinded car apologist, which was also part of the commentary along with the number AND substance of comments.
Here's a better idea- here's what you wrote
That's the first line you wrote. That's where the goalposts are set by you.
For the sake of openness, here is what you wrote next
I replied at first-
Your two sentences sum up your view, that the comment count is the most important thing. I replied at first, in as trollish a tone as you took, that in fact there were no comments because everyone sees that the driver is most likely at fault. As Sunday afternoon went on and you started to get the comment count you wanted, it dawned on me that this will probably get more comments than the double homicide, which it has. Bingo. Worse yet, I assumed something about you. I assumed that you in fact think that the deaths of two people is more serious an issue than a car crash that yielded not one injury. I apologize. You really, really think that this is the bigger issue. Sad.
I guess it weird you didn't at least link to a car-related post
You know, maybe one with a few dozen comments railing on scofflaw motorists that would compare with Hubway post? I mean you could at least link to the one a few weeks back about the old dude in Dot who got his car stuck on the median after recklessly driving away from the police. Hell it even has a few car apologist comments to boot!
I think you type a lot but tend to get away from the point either of us was trying to make, so maybe lets simplify it. Some people who bike and drive suck, sometimes a cyclilst almost hits someone and its "this is an epidemic that needs to be stopped", sometimes a car actually hits something and its "oh well what can you."
This tends to be reflected in the volume and content of comments. To think that I care less about the deaths of two people compared with a car crash, I really don't know to say about that, its an odd attack to make.
A short reply to make my point
Comments on an article is a meaningless metric of how readers feel about the issue at hand.