For anyone else who had no idea what a sideshow was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideshow_(automobile_exhibition) "Street takeover" or "automotive stunts" would've made it far clearer to me,...
A sideshow (so-called in the San Francisco Bay Area, and a street takeover in the Los Angeles area) is an informal and often illegal demonstration of automotive stunts now often held in vacant lots, and public intersections, originally seen in the East Bay region of the San Francisco Bay Area, United States. Sideshows first appeared in Oakland, California in the 1980s as informal social gatherings of Bay Area youth.
"Street takeover" or "automotive stunts" would've made it far clearer to me, though I suppose terms aren't made to suit some nerd who lives in the woods thousands of miles from San Francisco!
Seems like traffic cameras and a bylaw that permanently confiscates cars would be a simpler solution. They're doing that kind of thing in Pico Rivera. Take a few cars away and people will stop...
Seems like traffic cameras and a bylaw that permanently confiscates cars would be a simpler solution. They're doing that kind of thing in Pico Rivera. Take a few cars away and people will stop doing it, and we won't have irritating metal plates in the roads.
The Pico Rivera ordinance is especially tough because it empowers police to effectively confiscate a car forever if it’s part of a sideshow. What’s more, the owner doesn’t need to be the driver; police can confiscate the car if the driver is a family member of the owner or lives at the same address. Pico Rivera’s ordinance has already attracted attention from other nearby California municipalities so, you know, cut the crap, people.
This is the approach taken in Australia, variously among the states such drivers are referred to as "hoons" and this terminology has migrated into "anti-hoon legislation". In some states up to ten...
This is the approach taken in Australia, variously among the states such drivers are referred to as "hoons" and this terminology has migrated into "anti-hoon legislation". In some states up to ten cars per day were impounded on grounds of excessive noise, burnouts, dangerous driving, street racing, etc. In other states, the penalty for "hooning" is thousands of dollars per charge, or six months imprisonment.
Is it still a problem in Australia though? That wiki article seems to indicate there’s been a rise in hoon groups in the 2010s so after laws confiscating vehicles were put into effect.
Is it still a problem in Australia though? That wiki article seems to indicate there’s been a rise in hoon groups in the 2010s so after laws confiscating vehicles were put into effect.
There was a 'special investigation' last night on the news. It is very much a current issue, with hoon groups using social media to announce burnout/street drags minutes before the events and...
There was a 'special investigation' last night on the news. It is very much a current issue, with hoon groups using social media to announce burnout/street drags minutes before the events and large numbers of cars converging onto the area. Then they post videos online afterwards to brag about it. There was video footage shown on the evening news of cars doing circle work within metres of houses, road barriers, and even running over people.
I'm not sure how directly relevant this is, but the Channel 5 News video on Connecticut Kia Boys was eye-opening. I can't even begin to empathize with people who steal cars and joyride in them....
I'm not sure how directly relevant this is, but the Channel 5 News video on Connecticut Kia Boys was eye-opening. I can't even begin to empathize with people who steal cars and joyride in them. Their ethics and experience are so staggeringly different from my own that it kind of breaks my brain. I just don't know how the justice system can even catch someone like that, let alone reform them.
The Bay Area’s five most populous cities — San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Fremont and Santa Rosa — all confirmed that they have installed physical structures aimed at deterring sideshows at problem intersections.
San Francisco gave the treatment to 10 intersections between September 2022 and July 2024, largely focusing on “hardening” the centerline using rubber humps. San Jose has reshaped 16 intersections in the past three years, building pedestrian bulb-outs and islands that narrow the roadway, which makes it trickier to whip a car around. Oakland’s sideshow prevention pilot has transformed 10 intersections. In Fremont, city workers filled a problem cul-de-sac at Clipper Court with more than 40 plastic “tuff curbs” paired with poles to transform the open asphalt into narrow lanes.
And in Santa Rosa, it’s been one experiment after another. Officials began trying out infrastructure solutions after it became clear that sideshows were proliferating there about four years ago, according to Lt. Josh Ludtke, who leads the police department’s traffic division.
…
Despite numerous requests to sideshow-proof other intersections in the years since, Sen hasn’t been able to implement changes at other spots for fear of impeding regular traffic.
Still, he thinks there’s another experiment going on — an accidental one. A growing movement in traffic engineering is to design intersections with “road diets”: bike lanes, medians and curb extensions that narrow streets, encouraging slower driving. While road diets weren’t designed to combat sideshows, they may well end up having that effect.
I mean it seems like the changes are improving pedestrian and bike infrastructure. Even if they aren’t super effective at stopping sideshows I wonder what it is doing for pedestrian and bike safety.
I mean it seems like the changes are improving pedestrian and bike infrastructure. Even if they aren’t super effective at stopping sideshows I wonder what it is doing for pedestrian and bike safety.
I don't know if it's fair to call it "making the streets more annoying". It looks like the people in this article made great efforts to ensure their measures had as little negative impact as...
I don't know if it's fair to call it "making the streets more annoying". It looks like the people in this article made great efforts to ensure their measures had as little negative impact as possible on regular driving and cycling. Designing streets in a way that discourages annoying behavior has the net benefit of making the streets less annoying to everyone overall. The equation should include people who don't drive, as they're still affected by the roads and drivers thereon.
This isn't the same exact subject, but related: many drivers seem to get annoyed by calming measures, but I get far more annoyed by a wide, straight and open road with a 25mph sign than I do with one that has put up speed humps and similar obstacles. The first one screams incompetent design, whereas the other makes that speed feel natural, and has the added benefit of removing pressure from impatient drivers who would otherwise blast through and/or aggressively tailgate other vehicles.
Speed humps don't seem natural at all to me, but I'll concede that they're probably necessary when retrofitting streets that didn't start out with a better design. Sometimes a bigger change is...
Speed humps don't seem natural at all to me, but I'll concede that they're probably necessary when retrofitting streets that didn't start out with a better design. Sometimes a bigger change is more expensive than it's worth.
Hey, I've got nothing against weird metal plates at intersections. Then again, I've got nothing against idiots whipping shitties in intersections either, but I suppose they aren't doing it within...
Hey, I've got nothing against weird metal plates at intersections. Then again, I've got nothing against idiots whipping shitties in intersections either, but I suppose they aren't doing it within earshot of my home.
Even then, if they're emboldened enough to do it on public streets, why not take their antics to Walmart parking lots or something similar? Way more space, you don't need to block roads, and probably not even that much harder to run from the cops if they do show up. Then again, there's probably not that much thought/organization being put into these events to begin with.
Taking over a public street is part of the appeal, I imagine. It's an assertion of power. Not only are they showing off, they're doing it right in the middle of everything. And they leave their...
Taking over a public street is part of the appeal, I imagine. It's an assertion of power. Not only are they showing off, they're doing it right in the middle of everything. And they leave their marks for everyone to see afterwards. I bet it's a bigger rush than doing the same in a dark, out of the way parking lot.
I feel for the people who have to deal with these, though. It's super obnoxious behavior.
Would that be the appropriate response? All for what? Some reckless driving citations. Car chases are dangerous with a lot of potential for collateral damage. Probably not the best idea either....
Would that be the appropriate response? All for what? Some reckless driving citations. Car chases are dangerous with a lot of potential for collateral damage. Probably not the best idea either.
The police trying nothing and then throwing up their hands saying they don't know what to do sounds very typical to me. But these infrastructure-based responses make a lot of sense to me. Deter people from doing it in the first place so that the police don't need to get involved at all.
So is the complaint that they're not using that equipment against these people or that they have that equipment in the first place because I don't see how those methods would be a positive.
So is the complaint that they're not using that equipment against these people or that they have that equipment in the first place because I don't see how those methods would be a positive.
The bigger problem with sideshows is that there are often guns, drugs, and alcohol present. People usually get hurt. Edit: I also wonder what effect the feeling of lawlessness has on the...
The bigger problem with sideshows is that there are often guns, drugs, and alcohol present. People usually get hurt.
Edit: I also wonder what effect the feeling of lawlessness has on the community. If someone can break the rules in a large public manner, does that reduce others’ feelings of obligation to act in ways that benefit the community?
they do take over Walmart parking lots. it's loud AF when they do so, and they roll the cops out eventually. I had a tow truck driver, ironically after totalling my own vehicle, tell me about how...
they do take over Walmart parking lots. it's loud AF when they do so, and they roll the cops out eventually. I had a tow truck driver, ironically after totalling my own vehicle, tell me about how he's often going to my local Wal Mart to tow a crashed vehicle.
I am from MN and I just assumed this was a universal term, I had no idea it was a regionalism. On the other hand, I suppose it doesn’t make a lick of sense
I am from MN and I just assumed this was a universal term, I had no idea it was a regionalism. On the other hand, I suppose it doesn’t make a lick of sense
It can't be too regional. I grew up in Oregon. I picked it up when I was a kid in the 90s from parents, uncles, etc., so it clearly wasn't a new term at that point either. That said, it seems...
It can't be too regional. I grew up in Oregon. I picked it up when I was a kid in the 90s from parents, uncles, etc., so it clearly wasn't a new term at that point either.
That said, it seems 50/50 whether someone in OR will say whipped a shitty or flipped a shitty. The latter I think came from cross-pollination with flipped a bitch, which is a u-turn (typically where a u-turn isn't allowed, and in an abrupt manner, but those qualifiers aren't strictly required).
Also when I was in training in the Air Force I shared a dorm room with three guys from PA, MN, and VA and they all knew what shitties and bitches were.
Maybe it's less of a regional thing and more of an age/generational thing? Maybe it's fallen out of favor with the people I think of as kids but are actually grown adults now.
I'm from OH and we never called it anything but donuts. And my dad attempted to show me how to do them in a parking lot while I was learning to drive (though he was foiled by the modern braking...
I'm from OH and we never called it anything but donuts. And my dad attempted to show me how to do them in a parking lot while I was learning to drive (though he was foiled by the modern braking system on his car), so I think he'd have told me if he called them something as fun as that.
You're not old, just not Northern Midwestern! It's a Minnesotan term for doing donuts. (Looks like North Dakota too.) That is not gonna catch on. Duck Duck Grey Duck has better odds.
You're not old, just not Northern Midwestern!
It's a Minnesotan term for doing donuts. (Looks like North Dakota too.)
That is not gonna catch on. Duck Duck Grey Duck has better odds.
I said it had better odds. But allegedly both names come from Swedish and it just depends on which regional Swedish immigrants settled in which country and state that led to Minnesota getting the...
I said it had better odds.
But allegedly both names come from Swedish and it just depends on which regional Swedish immigrants settled in which country and state that led to Minnesota getting the Grey Duck variation instead of the Goose variation. Just a hypothesis because no one actually knows.
Has anyone else noticed that police can crack down on thousands of mostly peaceful protesters with a militaristic show of force, arresting hundreds of people, yet when there's a sideshow with...
Has anyone else noticed that police can crack down on thousands of mostly peaceful protesters with a militaristic show of force, arresting hundreds of people, yet when there's a sideshow with hundreds of people, they throw their hands up in the air and can't do anything about it? 🤔
The protestors who show up to prepared hardpoints constructed around government buildings on pre announced days and times are easier to manage than sideshow participants who can use vehicles to...
The protestors who show up to prepared hardpoints constructed around government buildings on pre announced days and times are easier to manage than sideshow participants who can use vehicles to congregate at any open intersection in the city? Perhaps there's just a couple of small differences between those situations?
AFAIK many sideshows are announced on social media (that's how people know where to show up) and police are often aware of them in advance. Also, there are far more participants in the crowd than...
AFAIK many sideshows are announced on social media (that's how people know where to show up) and police are often aware of them in advance.
Also, there are far more participants in the crowd than can be picked up to flee in the participating cars. I think that if it were a priority, at least the participants could be arrested.
"Aware of" and "possessing the manpower and resources to dedicate to responding to" are not the same thing. Like skybrian posted: How many people did it take to do that bust? 4 vehicles were...
"Aware of" and "possessing the manpower and resources to dedicate to responding to" are not the same thing. Like skybrian posted:
Thanks to the combined efforts of multiple agencies, 14 arrests (mostly misdemeanor citations and releases) were made, and four vehicles were towed and placed on a 30-day hold.”
How many people did it take to do that bust? 4 vehicles were impounded out of 100 participating vehicles? It took multiple agencies cooperating to arrest 14 people, mostly citing them for misdemeanors and releasing them? How much did that cost?
Setting aside all other questions of policing policy in the US, is a police response to sideshows financially sensible as compared to just putting down traffic calming measures?
I'd be open to more enforcement, but I'm not sure it's a reasonable use of limited police resources? I mean, I'm not a fan of extensive awful screeching in the middle of the night anymore than...
I'd be open to more enforcement, but I'm not sure it's a reasonable use of limited police resources? I mean, I'm not a fan of extensive awful screeching in the middle of the night anymore than anyone else, and I understand why people might want to send in the cops to break them up. But when the "best" case of police enforcement is so piddly, maybe focusing on changing the built environment to disincentivise sideshows is the best solution to that particular issue. It would mean more police time to go after burglaries and other major crimes, which seem to also be a concern.
I suppose if additional avenues for vehicle confiscation were available, it would mean that police action would be more valuable. But as it stands, I don't see the payoff.
Protesters aren’t in giant ton-weight death boxes being driven with no concern for anyone’s safety. Most of the enforcement options - car chases, rolling out spikes, etc - have a pretty big chance...
Protesters aren’t in giant ton-weight death boxes being driven with no concern for anyone’s safety. Most of the enforcement options - car chases, rolling out spikes, etc - have a pretty big chance of injuring or killing pedestrians. Keep in mind that a lot of these shows have a lot of people crowded around and watching.
They sometimes do things about it: Northern California sideshow involving about 100 vehicles leads to arrests, tows 13 arrested in CHP weekend operation targeting Oakland sideshows They keep...
The agency continued, “Thankfully, CHP’s Air Operations Unit tracked the sideshow participants who thought it was a great idea to drive recklessly in our city, along with their spectating cheerleaders…Thanks to the combined efforts of multiple agencies, 14 arrests (mostly misdemeanor citations and releases) were made, and four vehicles were towed and placed on a 30-day hold.”
The police department reminded the community that sideshows are illegal and the consequences of participating in one include having your vehicle impounded for 30 days, which incurs fees that total about $2,500.
OAKLAND – The California Highway Patrol announced more than a dozen people were arrested and several stolen cars were recovered following an operation targeting sideshows in Oakland over the weekend.
According to the agency, a so-called "surge operation" took place on Saturday, which included assistance from a CHP helicopter and airplane. During the operation, the aircraft assisted in seven pursuits, leading to 13 arrests.
Officers were also able to recover eight stolen vehicles and two firearms.
For anyone else who had no idea what a sideshow was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideshow_(automobile_exhibition)
"Street takeover" or "automotive stunts" would've made it far clearer to me, though I suppose terms aren't made to suit some nerd who lives in the woods thousands of miles from San Francisco!
Seems like traffic cameras and a bylaw that permanently confiscates cars would be a simpler solution. They're doing that kind of thing in Pico Rivera. Take a few cars away and people will stop doing it, and we won't have irritating metal plates in the roads.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/california-city-can-soon-permanently-confiscate-cars-participating-in-sideshows
This is the approach taken in Australia, variously among the states such drivers are referred to as "hoons" and this terminology has migrated into "anti-hoon legislation". In some states up to ten cars per day were impounded on grounds of excessive noise, burnouts, dangerous driving, street racing, etc. In other states, the penalty for "hooning" is thousands of dollars per charge, or six months imprisonment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoon#Anti-hoon_legislation_in_Australia
Is it still a problem in Australia though? That wiki article seems to indicate there’s been a rise in hoon groups in the 2010s so after laws confiscating vehicles were put into effect.
There was a 'special investigation' last night on the news. It is very much a current issue, with hoon groups using social media to announce burnout/street drags minutes before the events and large numbers of cars converging onto the area. Then they post videos online afterwards to brag about it. There was video footage shown on the evening news of cars doing circle work within metres of houses, road barriers, and even running over people.
In Oakland, it seems that sometimes they're stolen cars.
I'm not sure how directly relevant this is, but the Channel 5 News video on Connecticut Kia Boys was eye-opening. I can't even begin to empathize with people who steal cars and joyride in them. Their ethics and experience are so staggeringly different from my own that it kind of breaks my brain. I just don't know how the justice system can even catch someone like that, let alone reform them.
From the article:
…
I mean it seems like the changes are improving pedestrian and bike infrastructure. Even if they aren’t super effective at stopping sideshows I wonder what it is doing for pedestrian and bike safety.
I don't know if it's fair to call it "making the streets more annoying". It looks like the people in this article made great efforts to ensure their measures had as little negative impact as possible on regular driving and cycling. Designing streets in a way that discourages annoying behavior has the net benefit of making the streets less annoying to everyone overall. The equation should include people who don't drive, as they're still affected by the roads and drivers thereon.
This isn't the same exact subject, but related: many drivers seem to get annoyed by calming measures, but I get far more annoyed by a wide, straight and open road with a 25mph sign than I do with one that has put up speed humps and similar obstacles. The first one screams incompetent design, whereas the other makes that speed feel natural, and has the added benefit of removing pressure from impatient drivers who would otherwise blast through and/or aggressively tailgate other vehicles.
Speed humps don't seem natural at all to me, but I'll concede that they're probably necessary when retrofitting streets that didn't start out with a better design. Sometimes a bigger change is more expensive than it's worth.
Hey, I've got nothing against weird metal plates at intersections. Then again, I've got nothing against idiots whipping shitties in intersections either, but I suppose they aren't doing it within earshot of my home.
Even then, if they're emboldened enough to do it on public streets, why not take their antics to Walmart parking lots or something similar? Way more space, you don't need to block roads, and probably not even that much harder to run from the cops if they do show up. Then again, there's probably not that much thought/organization being put into these events to begin with.
Taking over a public street is part of the appeal, I imagine. It's an assertion of power. Not only are they showing off, they're doing it right in the middle of everything. And they leave their marks for everyone to see afterwards. I bet it's a bigger rush than doing the same in a dark, out of the way parking lot.
I feel for the people who have to deal with these, though. It's super obnoxious behavior.
Would that be the appropriate response? All for what? Some reckless driving citations. Car chases are dangerous with a lot of potential for collateral damage. Probably not the best idea either.
The police trying nothing and then throwing up their hands saying they don't know what to do sounds very typical to me. But these infrastructure-based responses make a lot of sense to me. Deter people from doing it in the first place so that the police don't need to get involved at all.
So is the complaint that they're not using that equipment against these people or that they have that equipment in the first place because I don't see how those methods would be a positive.
The bigger problem with sideshows is that there are often guns, drugs, and alcohol present. People usually get hurt.
Edit: I also wonder what effect the feeling of lawlessness has on the community. If someone can break the rules in a large public manner, does that reduce others’ feelings of obligation to act in ways that benefit the community?
they do take over Walmart parking lots. it's loud AF when they do so, and they roll the cops out eventually. I had a tow truck driver, ironically after totalling my own vehicle, tell me about how he's often going to my local Wal Mart to tow a crashed vehicle.
Sorry, I have to ask. Maybe I'm old, but ... "Whipping shitties" ?
lol sorry. NotAFae is right, its common slang where I'm from. Can't say I know its origins, but its something people around here always say.
I am from MN and I just assumed this was a universal term, I had no idea it was a regionalism. On the other hand, I suppose it doesn’t make a lick of sense
It can't be too regional. I grew up in Oregon. I picked it up when I was a kid in the 90s from parents, uncles, etc., so it clearly wasn't a new term at that point either.
That said, it seems 50/50 whether someone in OR will say whipped a shitty or flipped a shitty. The latter I think came from cross-pollination with flipped a bitch, which is a u-turn (typically where a u-turn isn't allowed, and in an abrupt manner, but those qualifiers aren't strictly required).
Also when I was in training in the Air Force I shared a dorm room with three guys from PA, MN, and VA and they all knew what shitties and bitches were.
Maybe it's less of a regional thing and more of an age/generational thing? Maybe it's fallen out of favor with the
people I think of askidsbut are actually grown adults now.I'm 40 and from IL and never heard anything but donuts. So idk, but the internet said it was regional.
I'm from OH and we never called it anything but donuts. And my dad attempted to show me how to do them in a parking lot while I was learning to drive (though he was foiled by the modern braking system on his car), so I think he'd have told me if he called them something as fun as that.
You're not old, just not Northern Midwestern!
It's a Minnesotan term for doing donuts. (Looks like North Dakota too.)
That is not gonna catch on. Duck Duck Grey Duck has better odds.
Oh right, thanks!! Donuts I can relate to, even from here in the UK. Some car meets will involve donuts. And not the delicious kind.
Hey, Duck Duck Grey Duck is the OG. The rest of the world is the one that incorrectly appropriated it.
I said it had better odds.
But allegedly both names come from Swedish and it just depends on which regional Swedish immigrants settled in which country and state that led to Minnesota getting the Grey Duck variation instead of the Goose variation. Just a hypothesis because no one actually knows.
There's no evidence that one came first though.
Trust me, its the OG. Evidence is overrated.
You're going to be disappointed if you think that angle will work... But then you're probably a Vikings fan so... Kinda used to it huh?
(☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞
Got me 😞
(･–･) \(･◡･)/
💜
Has anyone else noticed that police can crack down on thousands of mostly peaceful protesters with a militaristic show of force, arresting hundreds of people, yet when there's a sideshow with hundreds of people, they throw their hands up in the air and can't do anything about it? 🤔
The protestors who show up to prepared hardpoints constructed around government buildings on pre announced days and times are easier to manage than sideshow participants who can use vehicles to congregate at any open intersection in the city? Perhaps there's just a couple of small differences between those situations?
AFAIK many sideshows are announced on social media (that's how people know where to show up) and police are often aware of them in advance.
Also, there are far more participants in the crowd than can be picked up to flee in the participating cars. I think that if it were a priority, at least the participants could be arrested.
"Aware of" and "possessing the manpower and resources to dedicate to responding to" are not the same thing. Like skybrian posted:
How many people did it take to do that bust? 4 vehicles were impounded out of 100 participating vehicles? It took multiple agencies cooperating to arrest 14 people, mostly citing them for misdemeanors and releasing them? How much did that cost?
Setting aside all other questions of policing policy in the US, is a police response to sideshows financially sensible as compared to just putting down traffic calming measures?
I think it’s a “why not both” sort of thing. Sideshows are common enough in the bay area that it’s worth more enforcement to suppress them, too,
I'd be open to more enforcement, but I'm not sure it's a reasonable use of limited police resources? I mean, I'm not a fan of extensive awful screeching in the middle of the night anymore than anyone else, and I understand why people might want to send in the cops to break them up. But when the "best" case of police enforcement is so piddly, maybe focusing on changing the built environment to disincentivise sideshows is the best solution to that particular issue. It would mean more police time to go after burglaries and other major crimes, which seem to also be a concern.
I suppose if additional avenues for vehicle confiscation were available, it would mean that police action would be more valuable. But as it stands, I don't see the payoff.
Protesters aren’t in giant ton-weight death boxes being driven with no concern for anyone’s safety. Most of the enforcement options - car chases, rolling out spikes, etc - have a pretty big chance of injuring or killing pedestrians. Keep in mind that a lot of these shows have a lot of people crowded around and watching.
They sometimes do things about it:
Northern California sideshow involving about 100 vehicles leads to arrests, tows
13 arrested in CHP weekend operation targeting Oakland sideshows
They keep happening, though.