Holy shatz! Cop stops bicycle!

Daniel J. Stern said:

There's no law requiring registration of bicycles or
carrying an operator's license -- or, for that matter, any
form of identification at all --

Nor should there be.

It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike,
yet back in the days when everyone rode around on horseback,
a license wasn't required.

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:02:32 -0400, "Daniel J. Stern" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Now, it did my heart a lot of good to see and hear this.
There are way too many badly-behaved bicyclists in Toronto,
as there are in every other city.

Nice troll, but I only give it a 1.5.

Google only shows two posts to Usenet, and they're in
'automobile' and 'motorcycle' groups.

Get a life, maybe?

-Badger

Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:

Who cares? User Name of the Month Award!!!

Bill "Rose Marie had a... nah, can't go there" S.

maxo said:

Riding your bike on the sidewalk on Sheridan road in
Chicago WILL get your bike impounded. Irony is that it's
one of the scariest places for even experienced riders in
town--I've seen full dress racer boys chicken out and jump
up on the sidewalk there.

Yeesh. Sounds like fun and merriment for all involved...

Florence Henderson Had A Mullet said:

Quoted message said:

There's no law requiring registration of bicycles or
carrying an operator's license -- or, for that matter,
any form of identification at all --

Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same
rules of the road...except there are no teeth to this
requirement, since there's no means by which to exact
consequences if they flout traffic law. If bicycles are to
be taken seriously as a means of transportation, enforceable
consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

Quoted message said:

It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a
bike, yet back in the days when everyone rode around on
horseback, a license wasn't required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

-Stern

Badger_South said:

Quoted message said:

Now, it did my heart a lot of good to see and hear this.
There are way too many badly-behaved bicyclists in
Toronto, as there are in every other city.

Nice troll, but I only give it a 1.5.

'cept it wasn't a troll.

Quoted message said:

Google only shows two posts to Usenet

You're kidding, right? I've been on Usenet since early '94.
Infrequent posts to rec.bicycles.misc, but *thousands* of
posts to rec.autos.*, sci.engr.lighting, us.talk.headline-
news, and others.

Quoted message said:

'motorcycle' groups.

Nope, don't think I've posted to motorcycle groups.

-Stern

In article said:

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There's no law requiring registration of bicycles or
carrying an operator's license -- or, for that matter,
any form of identification at all --

Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same
rules of the road...except there are no teeth to this
requirement, since there's no means by which to exact
consequences if they flout traffic law If bicycles are to
be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is
critical.

So you are going to require people to license their shoes
too? Your arguements apply in the same manner.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a
bike, yet back in the days when everyone rode around on
horseback, a license wasn't required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

I think you should watch some old films from the early
20th century.

Daniel J. Stern said:

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

Then maybe cars should be banned from the roads.

Let's face it: A lot of roads were built before cars were
invented. So do cars really have a right to be on our roads?

"Daniel J. Stern" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There's no law requiring registration of bicycles or
carrying an operator's license -- or, for

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

matter, any form of identification at all --

Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same
rules of the road...except there are no teeth to this
requirement, since there's no means by which to exact
consequences if they flout traffic law. If bicycles are to
be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is
critical.

So you think cyclists should be required to have a license
and registration? Below what age should we then ban cycling?
16? 14? 13?

Pete and no, let's not get into a cross post war with
wreck.autos

Are BMX kids the worst offenders? I think it's a tie between
them and DUI Charlies. I saw a teenager on a BMX yesterday.
He was wearing a walkman, and cut across two lanes of
traffic(not at the intersection), and proceeded to ride down
the turning lane. Geez.....

Gooserider said:

Are BMX kids the worst offenders? I think it's a tie
between them and DUI Charlies. I saw a teenager on a BMX
yesterday. He was wearing a walkman, and cut across two
lanes of traffic(not at the intersection), and proceeded to
ride down the turning lane. Geez.....

I don't know if they're BMX bikes, but the riders where I
live who exhibit the most robust death-wish wear wool
stocking caps, pants several sizes too big, and have their
seats adjusted so low that their knees come up around their
chin. They use only one hand, the other one either dangles
or has a cigarette.

Florence Henderson Had A Mullet said:

Quoted message said:

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

Then maybe cars should be banned from the roads.

Except that this is reality, not dreamy-dream land.

Quoted message said:

Let's face it: A lot of roads were built before cars
were invented. So do cars really have a right to be on
our roads?

Nonsequitur.

-Stern

Daniel J. Stern said:

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same
rules of the road...except there are no teeth to this
requirement, since there's no means by which to exact
consequences if they flout traffic law. If bicycles are to
be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is
critical.

I don't know about the laws in your state, but in mine
breaking traffic laws on a bicycle makes you subject to the
same tickets and fines as doing it with a auto. To say that
the law only can be enforced if you have a license is
nonsense. You have to prove ID to the police officer issuing
the ticket regardless if you have a license. Can't prove who
you are to the police officers satisfaction then he can hold
you until you can. Therefore the courts have the same
"..means to exact consequences..". If we believe your
argument then we would think that a dog walker couldn't be
issued a ticket for having a unleashed dog because he
doesn't have a dog walking license nor could a litterbug get
a ticket because he doesn't have a dumping license.

---
Joe REMOVE "Adds" before e-mailing

In rec.autos.driving said:

maxo said:

Riding your bike on the sidewalk on Sheridan road in
Chicago WILL get your bike impounded. Irony is that it's
one of the scariest places for even experienced riders in
town--I've seen full dress racer boys chicken out and
jump up on the sidewalk there.

Yeesh. Sounds like fun and merriment for all involved...

Only an idiot would ride on Sheridan Road, or any of a
thousand other streets that were laid out in the horse-and-
buggy days and thus BARELY have enough width for the four
lanes of automobile traffic for which they are striped, let
alone a bicycle riding along the right hand side.

Unfortunately, although there is a fabulous bike path that
starts at Hollywood and goes south all the way to Jackson
Park, and another one that begins in Evanston and goes north
through Wilmette and along the former North Shore Line right-of-
way past Ravinia, there is a huge gap in the middle between
Hollywood and South Boulevard with no bike path - just ultra-
congested, super-narrow Sheridan Road. This is undoubtedly a
big part of why some pedalcyclists use it despite the
obvious hazards.

--
Sloth is the first deadly sin.

In rec.autos.driving said:

Quoted message said:

Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
road...except there are no teeth to this requirement,
since there's no means by which to exact consequences if
they flout traffic law If bicycles are to be taken
seriously as a means of transportation, enforceable
consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

So you are going to require people to license their shoes
too? Your arguements apply in the same manner.

Shoes are not vehicles.

--
Sloth is the first deadly sin.

In rec.bicycles.misc Scott in Aztln said:

pedalcyclists use it despite the obvious hazards.

pedalcyclists? ohhhh, the joys of crossposting.
--
david reuteler [email hidden]

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
:: On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A
:: Mullet wrote:
::
:::: Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.
:::
::: Then maybe cars should be banned from the roads.
::
:: Except that this is reality, not dreamy-dream land.
::
::: Let's face it: A lot of roads were built before cars
::: were invented. So do cars really have a right to be on
::: our roads?
::
:: Nonsequitur.

If the first sentence is true, it is a perfectly valid point
to ponder...

::
:: -Stern

Roger Zoul said:

::: Let's face it: A lot of roads were built before cars
::: were invented. So do cars really have a right to be on
::: our roads?

Quoted message said:

:: Nonsequitur.

Quoted message said:

If the first sentence is true, it is a perfectly valid
point to ponder...

While you're pondering irrelevancies, here're a few more in
the same inane vein: The earth was "invented" before mankind
showed up. Do we really have a right to be here?

Air existed before my bicycle's tires were manufactured. Do
I really have a right to trap air in my tires?

My home was built before I moved in. Do I really have a
right to be here?

-Stern

Stern wrote <snipped>:

Quoted message said:

"There's no law requiring registration of bicycles or
carrying an operator's license -- or, for that matter, any
form of identification at all -- while riding one. Should
be, but isn't. So what if the cop stops someone who hasn't
got ID? What, exactly, can the cop do? And even if s/he
succeeds in writing a ticket, what's to motivate the
recipient to pay it? There'll be no demerit points on his
driver's license (which s/he may not even have). There'll
be no increase in insurance premiums"

These depend entirely on what state you are living (or
riding) in. In California, for example, Cops will ask to
see the bike's regestration and call it in to be sure it
it's really your bike (and not stolen). Failure to prove
it is yours may result in your being brought in on
suspicion of theft.

Carying a valid ID is also required for all but minors in
CA. Again, you can be brought in if you don't (or can't)
prove you are who you say you are.

And _all_ traffic violations go on your driver's record if
you are operating ANY vehicle which is legal for street use,
and you are a FOOL if you think that the insurance companies
will pass up any reason to get more money out of you! LOL!!

- -

"May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear
for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗