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" <daster[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. <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]
    >in.umich.edu>, "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]
    > .umich.edu>,

    > 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...