Holy shatz! Cop stops bicycle!

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Daniel J. Stern, Jun 11, 2004.

  1. *Reposted, this time to correct groups*

    (Prefatory note to Brent: Yes, I'm aware there are many badly-behaved
    motorists. No, I don't think they should get off scot-free, either. Yes,
    I'm aware you're vehemently opposed to bicycle and rider registration. No,
    I don't buy your putative reasons for it. Yes, I know you have to respond
    to this post. No, I won't get in a pissing contest with you.)

    I was walking down Bloor St when I saw a copcycle pull over a cyclist for
    running a red light...talk about shock and awe! I've never seen the likes
    of this before. The cop ordered the cyclist to dismount, walk his bike to
    the corner and park it, then lectured the guy for a few minutes ("Red
    lights mean STOP, whether you're in a car or on a bike or on your feet!
    It's the same rules of the road for you as for everyone else who uses
    it!"). The guy was arguing that he bicycles in this area all the time,
    there were no cars coming, etc. The cop (surprise...) told the guy he was
    just warning him this time rather than writing a ticket, and eventually
    let him ride off.

    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. "Hey, lookit me! I'm a car! WHUP, now I'm a pedestrian! WHUP! Now
    I'm neither! Hey, lookit me riding on the wrong side of the street! After
    dark! Without lights or reflectors! Wearing all black! And if you hit me,
    it'll be all your fault, neener neener neener! Whoah, sucks to be you, red
    lights are only for cars!" etc.

    I'd like to see a lot more of this kind of police activity, but pragmatic
    questions pretty much scotch the idea. 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 (which s/he's not required to carry).
    There'll be no denial of renewed registration (also not required).

    Be nice if cops could/would (they probably can) write tickets and impound
    bicycles until the ticket is paid.

    -Stern (pedestrian/cyclist/driver)
     
    Tags:


  2. Badger_South

    Badger_South Guest

    On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 00:11:20 -0400, "Daniel J. Stern" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >*Reposted, this time to correct groups*


    >I was walking down Bloor St when I saw...


    >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.
    >
    >Be nice if cops could/would (they probably can) write tickets and impound
    >bicycles until the ticket is paid.
    >
    >-Stern (pedestrian/cyclist/driver)


    I hear your momma was picked up on that same corner. Only, not for bad
    biking behavior.

    -B
     
  3. Brent P

    Brent P Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, Daniel J. Stern wrote:

    > I was walking down Bloor St when I saw a copcycle pull over a cyclist for
    > running a red light...talk about shock and awe!


    Quite different from my experience. I stop and the cop runs the red.

    > Now, it did my heart a lot of good to see and hear this.


    The only times I've been stopped by a cop is when they insisted I
    could not use the roadway but had to teeter on the couple inches
    of pavement to the right on the while line and left of the gravel.

    > I'd like to see a lot more of this kind of police activity, but pragmatic
    > questions pretty much scotch the idea.


    I'd like to see for ALL vehicles.

    > 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.


    This doesn't prevent a ticket from being written and legally binding.


    > 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 (which s/he's not required to carry).
    > There'll be no denial of renewed registration (also not required).


    Because a warrant will be issued for his arrest. This will turn up at
    a bad time like when he gets pulled over for driving 70mph on an empty
    expressway at 2am.

    > Be nice if cops could/would (they probably can) write tickets and impound
    > bicycles until the ticket is paid.


    Autos first. It would kill the speeding ticket industry. And btw, cops
    are already known to do just that, cept it's with anyone riding a bike
    within reach when there is some sort of protest or convention going on.
     
  4. Daniel J. Stern wrote:
    > *Reposted, this time to correct groups*
    >
    > (Prefatory note to Brent: Yes, I'm aware there are many badly-behaved
    > motorists. No, I don't think they should get off scot-free, either. Yes,
    > I'm aware you're vehemently opposed to bicycle and rider registration. No,
    > I don't buy your putative reasons for it. Yes, I know you have to respond
    > to this post. No, I won't get in a pissing contest with you.)
    >
    > I was walking down Bloor St when I saw a copcycle pull over a cyclist for
    > running a red light...talk about shock and awe! I've never seen the likes
    > of this before. The cop ordered the cyclist to dismount, walk his bike to
    > the corner and park it, then lectured the guy for a few minutes ("Red
    > lights mean STOP, whether you're in a car or on a bike or on your feet!
    > It's the same rules of the road for you as for everyone else who uses
    > it!"). The guy was arguing that he bicycles in this area all the time,
    > there were no cars coming, etc. The cop (surprise...) told the guy he was
    > just warning him this time rather than writing a ticket, and eventually
    > let him ride off.


    Okay, has anyone ever seen a cop let a driver off after they ran a red
    light? Hmmmm??

    Unless the driver was a politician or fellow cop, I doubt it.

    And I love the argument from the bicyclist: there were no cars coming.
    How the frig does he know? Is he psychic? There were no cars coming
    because he lived to tell about it. Had there been cars coming, they'd
    be scraping him off the street...

    ....And the gene pool would be 0.000000000000000001% better.



    John

    --
    To reply, remove "die.spammers" from address


    Von Herzen, moge es wieder zu Herzen gehen. --Beethoven
     
  5. Bob Newman

    Bob Newman Guest

    Too many to read every reply, I hope this wasn't touched on. We here in
    Florida have had police crack downs in the past giving cyclists tickets for
    not stopping, as you say "cyclists are subject to the same traffic laws as
    anyone else". That is not quite true in this case, cyclists are required to
    do more! Simply stopping at a stop sign can still get you a ticket IF you
    fail to put one foot fully on the ground. Comments?

    Bob

    "The Lindbergh Baby" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message news:[email protected]
    > Daniel J. Stern wrote:
    > > *Reposted, this time to correct groups*
    > >
    > > (Prefatory note to Brent: Yes, I'm aware there are many badly-behaved
    > > motorists. No, I don't think they should get off scot-free, either.

    Yes,
    > > I'm aware you're vehemently opposed to bicycle and rider registration.

    No,
    > > I don't buy your putative reasons for it. Yes, I know you have to

    respond
    > > to this post. No, I won't get in a pissing contest with you.)
    > >
    > > I was walking down Bloor St when I saw a copcycle pull over a cyclist

    for
    > > running a red light...talk about shock and awe! I've never seen the

    likes
    > > of this before. The cop ordered the cyclist to dismount, walk his bike

    to
    > > the corner and park it, then lectured the guy for a few minutes ("Red
    > > lights mean STOP, whether you're in a car or on a bike or on your feet!
    > > It's the same rules of the road for you as for everyone else who uses
    > > it!"). The guy was arguing that he bicycles in this area all the time,
    > > there were no cars coming, etc. The cop (surprise...) told the guy he

    was
    > > just warning him this time rather than writing a ticket, and eventually
    > > let him ride off.

    >
    > Okay, has anyone ever seen a cop let a driver off after they ran a red
    > light? Hmmmm??
    >
    > Unless the driver was a politician or fellow cop, I doubt it.
    >
    > And I love the argument from the bicyclist: there were no cars coming.
    > How the frig does he know? Is he psychic? There were no cars coming
    > because he lived to tell about it. Had there been cars coming, they'd
    > be scraping him off the street...
    >
    > ...And the gene pool would be 0.000000000000000001% better.
    >
    >
    >
    > John
    >
    > --
    > To reply, remove "die.spammers" from address
    >
    >
    > Von Herzen, moge es wieder zu Herzen gehen. --Beethoven
    >
     
  6. Paul

    Paul Guest

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

    <article snipped>

    > Be nice if cops could/would (they probably can) write tickets and impound
    > bicycles until the ticket is paid.


    AMEN to that. It would be espacially nice (for me anyways) if they would do this to
    these idiot kids who have no clue of and/or disregard the rules of the road.

    --
    Paul
     
  7. Bob Newman wrote:
    > Too many to read every reply, I hope this wasn't touched on. We here in
    > Florida have had police crack downs in the past giving cyclists tickets for
    > not stopping, as you say "cyclists are subject to the same traffic laws as
    > anyone else". That is not quite true in this case, cyclists are required to
    > do more! Simply stopping at a stop sign can still get you a ticket IF you
    > fail to put one foot fully on the ground. Comments?


    Sounds like the usual over-enforcement directed at auto drivers, where the
    cop says you "didn't stop" if you didn't wait 5 seconds before proceeding.
    The law needs to recognize that when your car rocks back on its springs,
    you've stopped.
     
  8. Guest

    <snip>. The cop (surprise...) told the guy he was
    > > just warning him this time rather than writing a ticket, and eventually
    > > let him ride off.

    >
    > Okay, has anyone ever seen a cop let a driver off after they ran a red
    > light? Hmmmm??
    >
    > Unless the driver was a politician or fellow cop, I doubt it.

    </snip>

    I'm neither and I've had warnings for that AND speeding while driving a car.

    <snip>
    > And I love the argument from the bicyclist: there were no cars coming.
    > How the frig does he know? </snip>


    A cyclist can see further down the road than drivers in a car coming to a
    stop. Also many states have provisions for cyclists, if there is no traffic
    at the light the cyclist can proceed due to the fact that bicycles may not
    trip the sensor to make the light change.

    Just as there are different rules for pedestrians, trucks, busses, and
    motorcycles... There are different rules for cyclists. Some need to be
    modified with the times but there are differences.
     
  9. Mike Baron

    Mike Baron Guest

    "<<<<<< ]] gun_dog99 [[ >>>>>>" wrote:

    >
    > stop. Also many states have provisions for cyclists, if there is no traffic
    > at the light the cyclist can proceed due to the fact that bicycles may not
    > trip the sensor to make the light change.


    Applies to all vehicles. If a signal is not working properly, one may
    proceed with caution. A vehicle not tripping a sensor indicates a
    siognal not working properly.
     
  10. On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Bob Newman wrote:

    > Florida have had police crack downs in the past giving cyclists tickets for
    > not stopping, as you say "cyclists are subject to the same traffic laws as
    > anyone else". That is not quite true in this case, cyclists are required to
    > do more! Simply stopping at a stop sign can still get you a ticket IF you
    > fail to put one foot fully on the ground. Comments?


    That seems silly and pecksnifian. For a well-balanced rider and bicycle,
    It's perfectly possible to come to the kind of complete and adequate stop
    that a stop sign requires without putting a foot fully on the ground.

    -Stern
     
  11. On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, The Lindbergh Baby wrote:

    > > it!"). The guy was arguing that he bicycles in this area all the time,
    > > there were no cars coming, etc. The cop (surprise...) told the guy he was
    > > just warning him this time rather than writing a ticket, and eventually
    > > let him ride off.

    >
    > Okay, has anyone ever seen a cop let a driver off after they ran a red
    > light? Hmmmm?? Unless the driver was a politician or fellow cop, I
    > doubt it.


    Hence my "(surprise...)".

    > And I love the argument from the bicyclist: there were no cars coming.
    > How the frig does he know?


    He just, y'know, *knows!* Shut up, he does too! Does too does too does
    TOO!

    (In fact, Bloor street is busy 24 hours a day. There are *ALWAYS* cars
    coming from three directions at the particular intersection this guy
    blew.)

    -Stern
     
  12. Daniel T.

    Daniel T. Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "Bob Newman" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Too many to read every reply, I hope this wasn't touched on. We here in
    >Florida have had police crack downs in the past giving cyclists tickets for
    >not stopping, as you say "cyclists are subject to the same traffic laws as
    >anyone else". That is not quite true in this case, cyclists are required to
    >do more! Simply stopping at a stop sign can still get you a ticket IF you
    >fail to put one foot fully on the ground. Comments?


    I think it's the same for mortorcycles, so I wouldn't say the cyclist is
    required to do more in this case.
     
  13. Daniel T.

    Daniel T. Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "Daniel J. Stern" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >*Reposted, this time to correct groups*
    >
    >(Prefatory note to Brent: Yes, I'm aware there are many badly-behaved
    >motorists. No, I don't think they should get off scot-free, either. Yes,
    >I'm aware you're vehemently opposed to bicycle and rider registration. No,
    >I don't buy your putative reasons for it. Yes, I know you have to respond
    >to this post. No, I won't get in a pissing contest with you.)
    >
    >I was walking down Bloor St when I saw a copcycle pull over a cyclist for
    >running a red light...talk about shock and awe! I've never seen the likes
    >of this before. The cop ordered the cyclist to dismount, walk his bike to
    >the corner and park it, then lectured the guy for a few minutes ("Red
    >lights mean STOP, whether you're in a car or on a bike or on your feet!
    >It's the same rules of the road for you as for everyone else who uses
    >it!"). The guy was arguing that he bicycles in this area all the time,
    >there were no cars coming, etc. The cop (surprise...) told the guy he was
    >just warning him this time rather than writing a ticket, and eventually
    >let him ride off.
    >
    >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. "Hey, lookit me! I'm a car! WHUP, now I'm a pedestrian! WHUP! Now
    >I'm neither! Hey, lookit me riding on the wrong side of the street! After
    >dark! Without lights or reflectors! Wearing all black! And if you hit me,
    >it'll be all your fault, neener neener neener! Whoah, sucks to be you, red
    >lights are only for cars!" etc.


    You sound upset because the bicyclest is allowed to do things an
    automobile driver is not allowed to do. When you see him take advantage
    of his greater freedom it upsets you. You want auto drivers to have that
    freedom to, or see it taken away from the bicyclest...

    I'm new to this car vs bicycle debate, yet is sounds very familliar to
    the debate over in rec.boats; there it's motor-boat vs sailboat.
    Different vehicles, but the same facts. How much property damage can a
    bicycle do compaired to a car? Can DUI bicyclests ram through the wall
    of the local McDonald's killing and injuring happy meal eaters? Isn't it
    true that a bicycle is inherently safer to opperate than a car? If not
    for the opperator, then certanly for everyone else?


    >I'd like to see a lot more of this kind of police activity, but pragmatic
    >questions pretty much scotch the idea. 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 (which s/he's not required to carry).
    >There'll be no denial of renewed registration (also not required).
    >
    >Be nice if cops could/would (they probably can) write tickets and impound
    >bicycles until the ticket is paid.


    Here you claim that the rules that bicyclest must obey are
    "unenforceable" because there is no license to revoke, insurance premium
    to jack up or points to accrue. However, there are many laws that people
    are expected to obey that fit the same profile; shoplifting for example.
    A shopper isn't required to carry a "shopping license" and won't have
    any insurance problems or get any points if he is caught stealing a loaf
    of bread.

    I'm not saying that bicyclests shouldn't be licensed, but I am saying
    that nothing you present here is a case for why they should.
     
  14. On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Daniel T. wrote:

    > >"Hey, lookit me! I'm a car! WHUP, now I'm a pedestrian! WHUP! Now
    > >I'm neither! Hey, lookit me riding on the wrong side of the street! After
    > >dark! Without lights or reflectors! Wearing all black! And if you hit me,
    > >it'll be all your fault, neener neener neener! Whoah, sucks to be you, red
    > >lights are only for cars!" etc.

    >
    > You sound upset because the bicyclest is allowed to do things an
    > automobile driver is not allowed to do


    No, see, that's just it: Bicyclists *AREN'T* allowed to do things (like
    run red lights) that cars aren't allowed to do. The guy who inspired my
    original post got ordered off his bike and lectured by a cop; sounded like
    next time the same cop sees him do the same thing, it'll be a ticket.

    > I'm new to this car vs bicycle debate


    That much is obvious. Such a "car vs. bicycle debate" is pointless.
    Roadway safety is EVERY road user's job, whether they be on foot, on a
    bike, on rollerblades, in a car, on a motorcycle...


    > How much property damage can a bicycle do compaired to a car?


    "Compared". Quite a bit, depending on how you define "cause". When a
    bicyclist touches-off a multi-vehicle incident, the total tab in injuries
    and damages can be quite large.

    > Can DUI bicyclests ram through the wall of the local McDonald's killing
    > and injuring happy meal eaters?


    They can ram through busy intersections against the light, causing
    multiple collisions as drivers attempt to avoid hitting them. Different
    venue, same effect.

    > Isn't it true that a bicycle is inherently safer to opperate than a car?


    Probably not.


    > you claim that the rules that bicyclest must obey are "unenforceable"
    > because there is no license to revoke, insurance premium to jack up or
    > points to accrue.


    That's right.

    -Stern
     
  15. Tom Keats

    Tom Keats Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "Daniel J. Stern" <[email protected]> writes:

    > "Compared". Quite a bit, depending on how you define "cause". When a
    > bicyclist touches-off a multi-vehicle incident, the total tab in injuries
    > and damages can be quite large.
    >
    >> Can DUI bicyclests ram through the wall of the local McDonald's killing
    >> and injuring happy meal eaters?

    >
    > They can ram through busy intersections against the light, causing
    > multiple collisions as drivers attempt to avoid hitting them. Different
    > venue, same effect.


    I've heard this point raised in the course of discussion before,
    but I've never seen nor heard of actual incidents where this
    has occurred. Has anyone? And if so, how often does it happen?

    --
    -- Powered by FreeBSD
    Above address is just a spam midden.
    I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
     
  16. On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Tom Keats wrote:

    > > They can ram through busy intersections against the light, causing
    > > multiple collisions as drivers attempt to avoid hitting them.
    > > Different venue, same effect.


    > I've heard this point raised in the course of discussion before, but
    > I've never seen nor heard of actual incidents where this has occurred.


    'cause the cyclist, having caused mayhem, simply decides he's a
    pedestrian, makes a 90-degree turn and cruises away from the scene. Did
    anyone get his license plate? Oh that's right...he DOESN'T HAVE TO HAVE
    ONE!
     
  17. Daniel T.

    Daniel T. Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Tom Keats) wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > "Daniel J. Stern" <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    >> "Compared". Quite a bit, depending on how you define "cause". When a
    >> bicyclist touches-off a multi-vehicle incident, the total tab in injuries
    >> and damages can be quite large.
    >>
    >>> Can DUI bicyclests ram through the wall of the local McDonald's killing
    >>> and injuring happy meal eaters?

    >>
    >> They can ram through busy intersections against the light, causing
    >> multiple collisions as drivers attempt to avoid hitting them. Different
    >> venue, same effect.

    >
    >I've heard this point raised in the course of discussion before,
    >but I've never seen nor heard of actual incidents where this
    >has occurred. Has anyone? And if so, how often does it happen?


    I saw something close. I was making a left turn (with the green light)
    when a bicyclist ran the light just as I was turning. Needless to say
    the bicyclist was going too fast for anyone to really react to his
    presence. He ended up hitting an SUV (note the bicyclist hit the
    vehicle, not the other way around.) The bike was totaled and the rider
    found himself flat on his back. Amazingly, the bicyclist wasn't hurt, of
    course the driver of the SUV wasn't hurt either, how could he be? Hell,
    I didn't even see any scratches on the side of his vehicle...

    I'm not going to claim that what Mr. Stern says never happens, but I
    expect that when something like that happens but its a car rather than a
    bike that is "ramming" through a busy intersection against the light, a
    hell of a lot more damage occurs.

    I still say he's just pissed because he sees bikes doing what he can't
    do in his car, but he isn't willing to ride a bike in order to have the
    privileges that bikers have. Of course, that doesn't stop him from
    wanting to take those privileges away from the bicyclists.
     
  18. Hunrobe

    Hunrobe Guest

    >[email protected] (Tom Keats)

    asked:

    >> They (meaning cyclists... ed.) can ram through busy intersections against

    the light, causing
    >> multiple collisions as drivers attempt to avoid hitting them. Different
    >> venue, same effect.

    >
    >I've heard this point raised in the course of discussion before,
    >but I've never seen nor heard of actual incidents where this
    >has occurred. Has anyone? And if so, how often does it happen?


    Specifically cyclists? No. But when I was in patrol I investigated literally
    hundreds of crashes that were caused by a third party's disregard for traffic
    rules and saw dozens of similiar circumstances with my own eyes. Almost without
    exception, those third parties just kept right on going. Unless it was one of
    those times that I *saw* the crash that is. Those people I stopped, returned
    them to the scene, listed them as involved parties on the crash report, and
    issued them tickets. Sometimes I miss patrol. <g>
    I think there are two main reasons that there aren't more documented cases of a
    cyclist causing a crash. First, unless the cop *sees* it he's not going to list
    the cyclist on the face of the report and most stats are gathered from the face
    of the report. Second, in comparison to motor vehicle traffic there really
    aren't that many cyclists on the road. It's rather like, how many crashes has
    anyone heard of that were caused by UPS delivery trucks? Not that many I'd
    wager and it's *not* because all UPS drivers are careful conscientious drivers
    that always obey the traffic laws.

    Regards,
    Bob Hunt
     
  19. Paul

    Paul Guest

    "Daniel T." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>,


    > I'm new to this car vs bicycle debate, yet is sounds very familliar to
    > the debate over in rec.boats; there it's motor-boat vs sailboat.
    > Different vehicles, but the same facts. How much property damage can a
    > bicycle do compaired to a car? Can DUI bicyclests ram through the wall
    > of the local McDonald's killing and injuring happy meal eaters?


    A DUI bicyclist could pull many types of idiotic maneuvers that could cause a car
    operator to lose control of his vehicle and plow into a McDonalds. And just why is
    that DUI bicyclist on his bicycle? Did he lose his DL because of multiple DUI's?

    --
    Paul
     
  20. Paul

    Paul Guest

    "Daniel T." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]

    > I'm not going to claim that what Mr. Stern says never happens, but I
    > expect that when something like that happens but its a car rather than a
    > bike that is "ramming" through a busy intersection against the light, a
    > hell of a lot more damage occurs.


    What Stern is seeing (and what lots of other drivers see) is cyclists disregarding
    the laws that they are supposed to be obeying. The difference is that the car driver
    gets a ticket, fine and higher insurance when caught. The cyclist just gets away with
    it.

    > I still say he's just pissed because he sees bikes doing what he can't
    > do in his car, but he isn't willing to ride a bike in order to have the
    > privileges that bikers have. Of course, that doesn't stop him from
    > wanting to take those privileges away from the bicyclists.


    Since when do bicyclists have the privlege of disregarding traffic laws that are
    there for the safety of everyone?

    --
    Paul
     
Loading...
Loading...