The Chainlink

Offense: Obey Traffic Control Device (While on Bicycle)


On the way to work this morning I was presented with a $75 ticket for running a red light.

At the intersection of Cicero and Elston I was stopped waiting for the light to change.  I saw the light on Cicero turn yellow, cars were slowing down, so I clipped in and started rolling into the intersection.  All cars were stopped and the light turned green (for me) when I was half-ish of the way through... I made it one block and a Chicago Police Officer pulled me over and handed me my awesome new prize.

I'm thinking of going to court on it (since it's lame and there's a principle to be fought for here) but I'm also thinking it'd cheaper to pay it and get my license back. 

Anyone else have experience in these matters?

~Ryan

Views: 1199

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Caitlin on May 21, 2010 at 8:18am
It seems like a lot of us use the Idaho-style "stop as yield" as a practical guideline, which makes sense to the cyclist. Unfortunately, since it's not how the law is written here, we have to trade "practical" for "legal".
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on May 21, 2010 at 8:50am
So you ride a bike because you refuse to stop for reds? How is it 'the mans' fault you blow reds? I drive everyday for work and I have received zero red light camera tickets because I follow the rules of the road when I drive. If I read this correctly you are OK with people blowing red lights; are you still going to think like this if you, or a loved one, are injured by somebody blowing a red light?

How is entering early not blowing the light? To violate the law all you have to do is enter the intersection while the signal is red; did he, or did he not, enter the intersection while the signal was red? How do you fight a ticket when there is already an admission that he broke the law?

Whether or not the officer should have written the ticket or not is irrelevant because regardless of all other factors he was still breaking the law. While the officer has flexibility in his decision to write a citation once the ticket is written the law is not flexible and as cyclists we do not want it to be.

A judge throws that ticket out he is setting a precedent that it is acceptable in the eyes of the law to enter an intersection early and because the law is shared by bikes and cars that opens up that defense to people driving cars.



roofis lee king said:
the reason i ride a bikew is because after like 6 75$ red light camera tickets for my car i said f that im not paying any more car tickets. f the man and his rules of the road. he only sorta blew the light. bot outright no stop blew it. i think a warnig ticket would have been more suitibale since the "rolling start isnt exactly blowing the light . take it to acourt and fight it. follow the law but know your rights

notoriousDUG said:
How is paying the fine for breaking the law letting 'the man' steal from you?

Wouldn't it be more like taking responsibility for your actions?

roofis lee king said:
fight it man, dont let the man steal 75 dollars from you
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on May 21, 2010 at 8:52am
When did it become OK for pedestrians to cross against a signal?

Or does being half car, half pedestrian add up to something greater than the sum of it's parts? A super commuter excused from following any of the rules of the road?

Don't get me wrong, I take lights and stop signs if I can do so safely but I am aware each time I do it that I can be ticketed for it and willing to accept that punishment for breaking the law; I also stop for both if I see a cop nearby.

r3tr0b0t said:
I see a bicyclist as half vehicle, half pedestrian, with advantages from both worlds. I've always maintained that one of those advantages is ignoring red lights when there is no traffic to yield to. I like to think that the people in cars, waiting at the light, get angry and jealous when they see how awesome and rebellious me and my bike are.
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on May 21, 2010 at 8:54am
If he sits in the bike lane get his car number and report him.

Ryan said:
Yeah. Big white suburban thing. I see him at Lawrence and Elston all of the time pulling cars over. He sits in the bike lane so I notice it quite often as I veer around him. So I guess that's a "speed trap" or whatever... and I should just be on my best behavior there from now on.

And everyone has pretty much nailed down the issue - it's legality versus common sense practice. I'm pretty sure those battles don't get fought and won in traffic court, though.

wig [ isaac ] said:
was the COP in a SUV?
Permalink Reply by Joel on May 21, 2010 at 8:57am
The ticket isn't even the only issue here. The more laws you visibly break in front of drivers, the less respect they have for cyclists. Every red light you blow burns up a little bit of good will for our community. Cyclists already have very little respect on the road, why make it even worse?

I'm ok with taking stop signs as yields if the road is entirely clear, but I follow stop lights to the T. I might make an exception if there were absolutely no cars around, but when there are cars you should follow the law.
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on May 21, 2010 at 9:27am
Well said.

Joel said:
The ticket isn't even the only issue here. The more laws you visibly break in front of drivers, the less respect they have for cyclists. Every red light you blow burns up a little bit of good will for our community. Cyclists already have very little respect on the road, why make it even worse?

I'm ok with taking stop signs as yields if the road is entirely clear, but I follow stop lights to the T. I might make an exception if there were absolutely no cars around, but when there are cars you should follow the law.
Permalink Reply by Brendan Kevenides on May 21, 2010 at 9:59am
I very much agree with notoriousDUG that there should be bicycle specific traffic laws in place in our state. (See Idaho stop here.) Rather than wasting your time in court fighting your ticket (and it would be a waste of time), contact your state representative and/or the Active Transportation Alliance and learn how to advocate for real change in Springfield.

Brendan.
Permalink Reply by Mike Keating on May 21, 2010 at 11:08am
The dynamics of riding in Idaho are very different than riding in Illinois, particularly the Chicagoland area. Quite simply, we have more people and more bikes, buses, cars, trucks, etc. I wrote a blog post on Idaho stops on www.ILBicycleLaw.com that you can find by clicking here. Keep in mind that, by the strict letter of the law, that bicyclists in Illinois are required to come to a complete stop at stop signs and stop for red lights.

In Illinois bicycles are required to adhere to ALL of the Rules of the Road. I wrote a blog article on this general subject that you can find by clicking here. This is part of a very interesting debate as to whether bikes should be treated totally equally, or whether they should be treated slightly differently.
Permalink Reply by Mike Keating on May 21, 2010 at 11:10am
Ryan,

In response to your specific question, if you have the time it is very possible that you could enter a plea and get the fine reduced in exchange for supervision, etc. Bottom line is you probably have little to lose by going to court if you have the time. Who knows, maybe the cop doesn't show up and your case gets thrown out.
Permalink Reply by mike w. on May 21, 2010 at 11:18am
i kinda doubt that the cop won't show. Chicago is hungry for revenue, so i imagine that they're not blowing off too many traffic court dates. Besides, it's really hard to win in a Chicago traffic court. Big part of why i try not to drive much in the city.


Mike Keating said:
Ryan,

In response to your specific question, if you have the time it is very possible that you could enter a plea and get the fine reduced in exchange for supervision, etc. Bottom line is you probably have little to lose by going to court if you have the time. Who knows, maybe the cop doesn't show up and your case gets thrown out.
Permalink Reply by Davo on May 21, 2010 at 11:19am
I say contest it. But don't necessaraly spend money on a lawyer. Maybe you go and the officer doesn't show up. Or he does and you have to pay the fine. Either way I see it as taking a day off from work (if you can afford to do so). Granted I don't know excatcly how contesting tickets work, but it is my understanding that if the officer doesn't show up it gets thown out. And if you gotta pay the ticket anyway, what harm is there to contest it?
Permalink Reply by Duppie on May 21, 2010 at 11:26am
Ah, yes. The Idaho stop.

A big reason why bicyclists maintain this law makes sense is the fact that a lot of bicyclists already ignore stop signs and red lights, so let’s simply codify that behavior and make it the law. According to this traffic count, cars don't stop for stop signs in comparable numbers as cyclists. So why don't we make it optional for cars while we are at it? Because it is less safe for cars to do so? I've seen no data that says it safer for bicyclists to treat stop signs as yield than it is for cars.

Idaho is a largely rural state where the largest city (Boise) has less than 200,000 citizens. I doubt that the traffic situation in Idaho can be compared with that in Chicago, where navigating traffic is one big compromise. So the argument that bicycling accidents in Idaho did not increase after the laws went into effect may or may not apply to Chicago.

The laws makes Idaho look like a very bike friendly state, but if you look at the history of the laws, specifically the red-light law, it doesn’t add up. In the book Pedaling Revolution, author Jeff Mapes makes the case that the red light law was approved because many intersections in Idaho have sensors in the ground to detect traffic. Bicycles rarely trip those sensors. The Idaho legislature did not want to spend the resources to update these intersections, so instead allowed bicyclists to proceed through a red light after coming to a full stop and yielding to traffic that has the ROW. That looks like a pragmatic solution to me, not a visionary one.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not against laws like those on the books in Idaho. I do however find it amusing that everyone seems to be in favor, simply because it would codify existing behavior and without examining the differences between Chicago and Idaho.Let's first look at whether improves safety for cyclists in Chicago, then we can talk further.

I can only hope that our state representatives have enough backbone to ask the safety question first, instead of simply bowing to demands from a small (as compared to the entire population) but vocal group

(Yes, I did largely copy this from a previous post. This issue seems to come up regularly, and the arguments don't change, so why not)


Chicago Bicycle Advocate said:
I very much agree with notoriousDUG that there should be bicycle specific traffic laws in place in our state. (See Idaho stop here.) Rather than wasting your time in court fighting your ticket (and it would be a waste of time), contact your state representative and/or the Active Transportation Alliance and learn how to advocate for real change in Springfield.
Brendan.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service