Leave us begin:
More years, and
on a bicycle in San Francisco County than anybody at the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, at WalkSF, and at the StreetsBlog (And to that tally you can also add driving vehicles and walking around and, perhaps, riding transit as well.
For example, we have this.
Note the use of the word “clear” here:
Now, here’s why you shouldn’t ever use the word clear or clearly or anything similar when you are “trying to win arguments” about anything:
“Clearly—It is common to see briefs with statements like “Clearly, the defendant is wrong,” or “Clearly, that is not the law.” It is ironic, but the statement that follows “clearly” is usually not clear. What follows is usually some conclusory, ipse dixit statement that is subject to question. So the word “clearly” weakens your argument. The same is true of its allies: obviously, undeniably, plainly, patently, undoubtedly and incontestably. You are better off omitting those words. Your writing will be stronger, because courts reflexively question what follows when they see “clearly” or its allies.”
Do you, Gentle Reader, know about the pedestrian bulb-out that is/was at the relevant corner of Sixth and Folsom, and how it differs from the similar southwest corners of Fifth and Folsom and Fourth and Folsom? Was the driver of the big rig supposed to pull into the narrow bike line to make the turn? IDK. Are diagrams out there that show how the accident occurred? Is the DA supposed to bring cases he thinks he’s going to lose?
You might know how to argue, but you don’t know how to persuade – that’s the problem.