Run a Stop Sign, Get a Ticket

aeiouy wrote:

"Bert Hyman" wrote in message
...
(aeiouy) wrote in
:

What a dickheaded cop. If any of them spent any time on a bike
they'd realize that you can safely go through a stop sign without
having to put a foot on the ground.

Most of the time, someone driving a car can safely roll through a
stop sign too.

Neither you or I were there so we don't know how these guys went through
the stop but yes you can come to a stop on a bike without having to put
a foot down. To take it one step further; in your opinion, if a jogger
came to that intersection and didn't stop jogging for 1 second before
continuing would they be guilt of jay walking?


But that's not what the law says, is it?

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |



is their feet licensed? Are they considered a vehicle?

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:34:33 -1000, aeiouy wrote:

What a dickheaded cop. If any of them spent any time on a bike they'd
realize that you can safely go through a stop sign without having to put a
foot on the ground.

I have read quite a bit about this (I live in Oregon) since the initial
news story.

It seems as though the cop WAS allowing the bicyclists to roll through the
stop sign so they would not have to put their feet on the ground. The three
who were arrested RAN the stop sign.

This, of course, does not make for a good news story.

Lobby Dosser wrote:
"aeiouy" wrote:

What a dickheaded cop. If any of them spent any time on a bike they'd
realize that you can safely go through a stop sign without having to
put a foot on the ground.

If you want to ride in traffic, you get to obey the traffic laws just
like the big kids.

Err, how does that violate a traffic law? I can (and do) come to a
complete stop on my bike every day without putting my foot down. I'm
not talking a 'California' or rolling stop. A real, zero mph, stop.

Now granted, that may not be what the previous poster was talking about.
His paragraph is somewhat ambiguous.

The other driver sounds like he should have gotten a minimum of a
couple of years.

Maybe. Depends on the situation. Apparently You don't know all of it.

He killed someone while driving under a suspended license. You might be
right in that legally he can't be prosecuted for something more serious
than a traffic violation. If so, that's a sad thing to hear.

Imagine, if instead of a random cyclist, they had killed your son or
daughter, or your elderly grandmother. Would you be more sympathetic to
more serious charges then?

--
Dane Buson -
Time Lords rule! Everything. Forever.

Dane Buson wrote:
Lobby Dosser wrote:
"aeiouy" wrote:
What a dickheaded cop. If any of them spent any time on a bike they'd
realize that you can safely go through a stop sign without having to
put a foot on the ground.
If you want to ride in traffic, you get to obey the traffic laws just
like the big kids.

Err, how does that violate a traffic law? I can (and do) come to a
complete stop on my bike every day without putting my foot down. I'm
not talking a 'California' or rolling stop. A real, zero mph, stop.

Now granted, that may not be what the previous poster was talking about.
His paragraph is somewhat ambiguous.

The other driver sounds like he should have gotten a minimum of a
couple of years.
Maybe. Depends on the situation. Apparently You don't know all of it.

He killed someone while driving under a suspended license. You might be
right in that legally he can't be prosecuted for something more serious
than a traffic violation. If so, that's a sad thing to hear.

Imagine, if instead of a random cyclist, they had killed your son or
daughter, or your elderly grandmother. Would you be more sympathetic to
more serious charges then?



Ask honu. He will tell you that dead is just dead nothing to get all het
up about.

Scratch wrote:
Dane Buson wrote:

Imagine, if instead of a random cyclist, they had killed your son or
daughter, or your elderly grandmother. Would you be more sympathetic to
more serious charges then?

Ask honu. He will tell you that dead is just dead nothing to get all het
up about.

Honu? Is that Xenu's younger brother or something?

--
Dane Buson -
"The more I work with computers, the better and better subsistence
farming looks as an alternative." -- David Cameron Staples in asr

Doc O'Leary wrote:

In article 1pkni.1080$I76.401@trnddc05,
Lobby Dosser wrote:

If you want to ride in traffic, you get to obey the traffic laws just
like the big kids.

If they rolled through a stop sign, it sounds like they *precisely*
obeyed the the traffic laws just like the big kids.

What part of "STOP" don't you understand?

Here's a fun
physics follow-up: if a 5000lb SUV rolls through a stop sign at 1mph,

Called a California stop in Oregon. And Not Legal.

how fast could a 250lb cyclist do it while carrying the same momentum?
Or is it asking too much for the laws of the government to follow from
the laws of physics?

Is it asking too much for cyclists to obey traffic laws?

"aeiouy" wrote:


"Lobby Dosser" wrote in message
news:1pkni.1080$I76.401@trnddc05...
"aeiouy" wrote:


"Paul J. Berg" wrote in message
...
~

From The (Portland) Oregonian - July 17, 2007

On a 100-mile ride from Portland to the Oregon coast, three
bicyclists pedaling through Washington County earlier this month
rolled past a stop sign in tiny North Plains and were pulled over
by the police chief.

Three citations later, the trio owed the municipal court more than
$1,000 in total fines. But that wasn't what steamed them or what
set off a flurry of snippy online messages between the small-town
cop and the big-city bicycle bloggers.

What aggravated them was the context of the incident, coming soon
after Aloha cyclist Timothy O'Donnell was struck and killed by a
driver with a suspended license who faced only fines for traffic
violations, such as careless driving and passing in a no-passing
zone. They were also annoyed by what they called "a lecture" from
North Plains Police Chief Scott Whitehead.
Jonathan Maus, editor of BikePortland.org, picked up the North
Plains story for his bicycle blog July 6 and set off a heated
online debate in the cycling community over the next five days.
The comments reflected long-simmering tensions that erupted after
O'Donnell's death and remain heated among drivers, cyclists and
police officers.


What a dickheaded cop. If any of them spent any time on a bike
they'd realize that you can safely go through a stop sign without
having to put a foot on the ground.

If you want to ride in traffic, you get to obey the traffic laws just
like the big kids.
You never go 5 miles over the speed limit?

Frequently. Sometimes more than that. If I get caught, I smile and pay
the fine. I Don't call the cop a 'dickhead'.




The other driver sounds like he should have gotten a minimum of a
couple of years.

Maybe. Depends on the situation. Apparently You don't know all of it.
From what was posted here I know enough to know that a) he was driving
under a suspended license b) he was passing in a no-passing zone c)
his actions killed a bicyclist. With that information I know he
should haev been charged with involuntary manslauther at least.

With that information you have no idea whether he should be charged with
manslaughter or not.

Dane Buson wrote:

Lobby Dosser wrote:
"aeiouy" wrote:

What a dickheaded cop. If any of them spent any time on a bike
they'd realize that you can safely go through a stop sign without
having to put a foot on the ground.

If you want to ride in traffic, you get to obey the traffic laws just
like the big kids.

Err, how does that violate a traffic law? I can (and do) come to a
complete stop on my bike every day without putting my foot down. I'm
not talking a 'California' or rolling stop. A real, zero mph, stop.

Good. I've done the same. Apparently the three who were fined did not do
that.


Now granted, that may not be what the previous poster was talking
about. His paragraph is somewhat ambiguous.

The other driver sounds like he should have gotten a minimum of a
couple of years.

Maybe. Depends on the situation. Apparently You don't know all of it.

He killed someone while driving under a suspended license. You might
be right in that legally he can't be prosecuted for something more
serious than a traffic violation. If so, that's a sad thing to hear.

Imagine, if instead of a random cyclist, they had killed your son or
daughter, or your elderly grandmother. Would you be more sympathetic
to more serious charges then?

I'd be sympathetic to charges anytime. But I don't know all of the
circumstances. And I don't think anyone else posting here does. If the
cyclist had run a stop sign, would you still be sympathetic to serious
charges?

Lobby Dosser wrote:
Dane Buson wrote:

Err, how does that violate a traffic law? I can (and do) come to a
complete stop on my bike every day without putting my foot down. I'm
not talking a 'California' or rolling stop. A real, zero mph, stop.

Good. I've done the same. Apparently the three who were fined did not do
that.

Fair enough. Personally I think they should take their tickets and stop
their whining.

The other driver sounds like he should have gotten a minimum of a
couple of years.

Maybe. Depends on the situation. Apparently You don't know all of it.

He killed someone while driving under a suspended license. You might
be right in that legally he can't be prosecuted for something more
serious than a traffic violation. If so, that's a sad thing to hear.

Imagine, if instead of a random cyclist, they had killed your son or
daughter, or your elderly grandmother. Would you be more sympathetic
to more serious charges then?

I'd be sympathetic to charges anytime. But I don't know all of the
circumstances. And I don't think anyone else posting here does. If the
cyclist had run a stop sign, would you still be sympathetic to serious
charges?

Yes. Because the driver was driving on a suspended license. There is
no justification for him being behind the wheel in the first place.
Now, would it be a mitigating circumstance if he had right of way and
the cyclist did the proverbial 'blowing the sign' right into his path?
Yes, I'd say so.

--
Dane Buson -
"Did you know that a cow was MURDERED to make that jacket ?"
"Yes. I didn't think there were any witnesses, so I guess I'll
have to kill you too." - Jake Johansen.

Dane Buson wrote:
Lobby Dosser wrote:
Dane Buson wrote:

Err, how does that violate a traffic law? I can (and do) come to a
complete stop on my bike every day without putting my foot down. I'm
not talking a 'California' or rolling stop. A real, zero mph, stop.
Good. I've done the same. Apparently the three who were fined did not do
that.

Fair enough. Personally I think they should take their tickets and stop
their whining.


I guess they'll have to eventually, but I don't think the punishment
fits the crime. Here in MA, the cycling moving violations are capped at
$20, which seems a lot more reasonable. Sounds like same fines for cars
& bikes in OR, which makes no sense.