KraneXL

Cops can be bullies, and they violate the law all the time. I recall the video of the women who was arrested for recording an arrest from her front lawn. Those cops not only violated her constitutional rights to record outside, but trespassing onto her property to do so.

CB HI

"Cops can be bullies, and they violate the law all the time. "
Like this one
and this one where the cop accused the cyclist of assault by ID card claiming she threw the ID card at him. see 1:05

Maelochs

This.

There is the law that gets upheld if you have the funds to fight for years through layers of appeals court, and there is the financial burden you get hit with when you get arrested and have to spend the weekend in jail, lose your camera;, have to hire a lawyer, lose the first case, hire another lawyer, appeal, etc.

"Cops usually get in trouble" usually means a reprimand ... or sometimes a fine, or settlement, which is of course paid by the taxpayers, not any cops.

This is the same issue we see where cyclists occasionally get ticketed for taking the lane because judges don't know the law and the cyclists cannot afford to appeal. And if a case goes to the jury .... well, juries are generally the twelve dimmest, most easily confused people thee two attorneys can pick out of the pool. Good luck explaining the finer points of law to people who cannot understand the issues discussed on "Jerry Springer."

I-Like-To-Bike

How many, if any bicyclist lane taking cases ever went before a jury? Or is that just a straw man you fabricated in order to segue in to a rant about your alleged knowledge about the alleged inferior quality of juries.

Maelochs

If you had reading comprehension and memory retention skills to match your depths of snark, you would recall that in other threads recently active in this section posters complained that cyclists in their region were being ticketed, and the tickets upheld in court, by judges who did not know or understand the "Far Right as Practicable" law.

Sorry for your inabilities.

JoeyBike

"Obstructing traffic" is what some local cops hand out tickets for around here when "taking the lane" is a really dumb idea as judged by the cop. However, since we have a large cycling population AND a bicycle attorney who does a lot of pro bono work, there is not a judge in town who does not know bicycle law very well. So generally a visit to the DA on your arraignment date gets the ticket torn up. Yeah, you gotta miss a day of work, get to the courthouse, etc., but at least the charge will never stick here. I gotta hand it to them on that score. And cops ticketing cyclists in NOLA is so very rare to begin with. There are many laws we all ignore here including the drinking in public laws. And if weed ever gets legalized I have a feeling the NOPD won't jump off a bridge worrying about smoking in public places either. Our cops are generally really laid back...until they're not. It takes a lot to set them off.

I-Like-To-Bike

How ironic that you refer to"reading comprehension". I suggest that you re-read the question that you think you are responding to.

I am not able, like you, to extrapolate evidence of actual bicycle lane traffic court cases going to jury from BF "poster complaints" based on second hand knowledge about other reports that were likely repeating someone else's complaint about cases that [Bottom Line] make no reference to going to a jury, let alone to one of those juries of dimwits that you were railing about.

KraneXL

Police target those that are least likely to defend themselves. Even if you're right, it takes resources to defend yourself. Something minorities, the poor and disenfranchised can't afford to do.After spending time monitoring the court system nothing frightens me more than being judged by a "jury of my peers". People will tend to render a verdict based on 'what they feel" rather than following the rule of law. If I had a choice on judge or jury trial I'd almost always chose a judge. City cops yes, HP or motorcycle cops are a different matter. Their main duty is giving out tickets.

One cop tried to cite me for taking the lane once. He was racing to work (speeding) and when I took the lane to avoid a pothole, he had to slam on his brakes. He was a detective and furious but didn't have any tickets so he called the motorcycle cops to come and harass me. I told them the law (they actually asked me for the code), and after delaying me while they looked through their code book, they finally let me go.

Funny thing, one of them said he knew me. Apparently we had worked for the same company when he was a mere security guard and before he become a cop.Those are what I call quota laws. Police only enforce those when they need extra brownie points or the community complains and they need to "clean up the streets."

Daniel4

Not a bad idea to have a bicycle camera. Cars have dash cams and cops have both dash cams and body cams.

It would be interesting if all three or four cameras of the same event may produce different interpretations based on each of their own point of views. And then there are closed-circuit security cameras that have become common.

And if the incidences aren't involving the courts, or nothing happened, big deal. The recordings can always be uploaded to youtube or facebook like so many bad driving or bad cycling videos go.

mr_bill

KraneXL

Like all things, there's always a point of diminishing return. Nevertheless, I have noticed that smeo guys do light up their bikes like a Christmas tree.

In my experience three should be the limit, and provides the best compromise between utility and safety. I have two strobes permanently mounted to my bike and affix an additional (high-mount) blinking red light to my helmet.

This combination can be seen by anyone from as far as a mile away. Its attention grabbing without being distracting. My headlight has only died once on me -- because I forgot to recharge it -- but I still need a backup (I have two flashlights but no mounts) just for those types of instances.

Maelochs

I always bring two headlights ... and at least two tail lights. The problem is, i cannot tell when the tail light dies because it is behind me.

I am sure someone somewhere is devising a tracking system to report on battery life, etc. and it only weighs three pounds and costs $200.

As with so many other topics here ... I am sort of glad I never got the memo that riding a bicycle was so fraught, so dangerous, so difficult ... I just go ride and enjoy it. i didn't realize I was doing it wrong.

Shimagnolo

When I used to do a lot of night riding (in the winter months), I used a Dinotte headlight and tail light.
I ran both from a single battery pack via the "Y-cable" they sell.
So if the battery pack got low, the headlight would signal it, then I would stop and swap the battery with a fresh spare.

Chris0516

My bike(before public transportation), is my major means of transport. I can't qualify for the Car-Free segment of the cycling population. Because I have never been able to drive. So, It is mostly necessity. Not recreation. Public transportation is only a back-up for me.

Maelochs

Thanks, i will look into this.

JoeyBike

I still use my bikes for utilitarian purposes because I do not have access to a car, other than occasional rentals and my wife's car (running errands for her if you see me in it). I just gave up any recreational or unnecessary bike rides.

Leisesturm

Split hairs much? Car free is as car free does. Whether one could drive in the past and now does not is irrelevant to the labeling. I'm curious as to why the 'Car Free' label invites such angst and outright denial? Even on the LCF sub-forum you will find more posts on how and why not to be car free and/or all the things wrong with being car free. SMH. And if you venture onto a roadway with a bicycle the drivers around you are not likely to notice or care that you are not having fun and/or that it is a necessary trip. Does this really need to be said. Surely people have been hit and killed on their very first and only bicycle trip involving public roads. Ironically, the data shows that the more rides under a given cyclists belt the more likely they are to have a long, accident free, cycling lifetime. There is that.

Maelochs

The weak and the stupid are culled. Those who cannot learn, cannot survive.

And indeed, it is no safer to be running an errand than to be cruising aimlessly around for kicks.

Chris0516

I mentioned Car-Free, as to the limitation of my transportation choices. I was not putting Car-Free in a negative light.

Ditto on your last sentence.

JoeyBike

Survival of the "fit enough" is something I agree with.

Sure, for any given location. If I biked to my job on a work day, or biked there on my day off, the risk is the same EXCEPT for the added/bonus exposure time.

If I limit my cycling to only absolutely necessary trips - work, bank, grocery, doctor, etc., and take what I believe to be the safest, low-key routes, I am safer than what I used to do was to bike 50 to 150 miles a day from the city to the country and back. I have cut back my exposure by 95% or more, which means I have eliminated motorists getting free shots at me by over 99%. If my math is correct, this makes me much less likely to get clobbered by a motorist while riding my bike. 50 miles per week on quiet back streets and greenways vs. 200-500 miles per week on every type or road and highway. I encounter maybe 100 cars per week now vs. 5000 when I was an avid rec cyclist (wild guess on that number).

So you should be able to see that running errands ONLY is safer than cruising aimlessly for kicks, in my case.

Limiting my exposure is one aspect of bicycle safety that is entirely under my control. Few (if any) other tactics offer such safety rewards.
.
.
.

livedarklions

Oh, good, another A&S thread becomes a discussion of @JoeyBike biking habits. Should there be a separate forum for that at this point, or would a sticky thread suffice?

JoeyBike

I ran a helmet cam for many years and posted about 200 videos of all sorts of traffic conditions. So there is relevance to me being here on this thread. Every A&S thread that goes past 3 pages leaves the rails. Why pick on me?

CB HI

He is joining the competition for most like ILTB post, that harp while contributing nothing.

livedarklions

It's about the 100th thread that you've posted the "I've given up recreational cycling" post in. Maybe just mix it up a bit better, ok?

Lemond1985

Because your perspective is just a little different. Chickens penned up together will gang up on, and peck to death, any individual that's the slightest bit different from the rest. Its human / chicken nature to do such things to the non-conforming. We see it every day on our bikes when riding among cars. Which circles us back to A&S and cameras, sort of.