Stop-sign sting at Kinzie and Kingsbury this am

Cops writing tickets for rolling the stop signs just east of the river, in the protected lane. You're gonna want to stop :-/. One of the cops told me he was going to "knock me off my bike if I didn't stop". As always, a bunch of sweethearts.

Views: 3783

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Zoetrope on August 24, 2012 at 7:30am

Once again, another genius solution to the cyclists rolling stop-signs pandemic and further proof that if you don't live in a wealthy area you can't count on the police for much.  I doubt there will be any lasting effects from the (likely) short lived police presence at this intersection.  Once the cops skeedaddle and go do something worthwhile, cyclists will go back to doing the same, and pedestrians will continue to not walk at designated crosswalks all over the city and not get ticketed.  It will be anarchy in the streets again.  

Permalink Reply by Dragonborn on August 24, 2012 at 7:35am

If you happen to not have any ID on you, you have no legal obligation to identify yourself to the police. You are not legally required to even give them your name and address. It doesn't matter whether you are being temporarily detained or if you are actually being arrested. The right to remain silent is your right. Now if a person wants to willingly give their information to the police, I have no issue with that. If a person wants to spend time at the police station, that's their problem.

I'm not talking about whether a person should or should not, I'm only stating the fact that one is not legally required to say anything when it comes to dealing with the police. Of course, any lack of cooperation may get you into more trouble, but that's not what I was asking about in my first post in this thread.

Let me be clear before someone else misunderstands me. I do not condone breaking the law, fleeing from the police, or lying to the police. If you blow a stop sign or red light and you get stopped by the police, that's not my problem or anybody else's problem. I was only asking three simple questions in the friendliest manner possible.



notoriousDUG said:

You do legally have to identify yourself to police; name and address are required beyond that they cannot force you to give them anything else unless you are being arrested.  It is true you are not required by law to carry ID but it is stupid not to; life is so much easier with it.  You also do not want to say you don't have one on you because if you are arrested and searched and they find out you had ID on you it opens a up a world of trouble.

You also have to obey a lawful command from an officer; if they yell stop and you do not stop they have the legal right to stop you physically; not only are they in the right pushing you off of your bike but you not stopping constitutes flight.

Permalink Reply by Cody Wolcott on August 24, 2012 at 7:40am

The CPD spends enough on lawsuits as it is.  Knocking people off bicycles is one of the last things they should be doing. 

Permalink Reply by Alkaline on August 24, 2012 at 7:53am

How about Cyclists just stop at stop signs and especially red lights? None of these stings would happen if not for the cyclists that think they are above the law and blow through every stop sign or light.

If you want to ride uninterrupted, that is why we have paths. The law is the law please follow it.

Permalink Reply by Zoetrope on August 24, 2012 at 8:05am

^-2

Permalink Reply by Alkaline on August 24, 2012 at 8:15am

^ yes that -2 is so mature. You realize that following the rules actually makes us look better over all and will lead to more support and less ass hattery from crappy columnists. It will also make it easier for us to get more protected lanes and be safer over all.

And not that it makes it better but I am sure the police officer who threatened probably had to deal with too many smug cyclists that think they are above the law when they are not. Is the extra 10 sec you save by not stopping really worth all the trouble it causes and the possible injury of a pedestrian? No.

Permalink Reply by Zoetrope on August 24, 2012 at 8:31am

I don't wan't the same rights or the same rules as cars.  I wan't different rules, because a car is not a bike and vice versa.  This is something that you and the plus one'rs will probably never get, sadly.  Read my other post above the last if you want to know how I feel.  I'm sure you probably have already and chose to reply to the snarky comment though, because it was more convenient for you to attack a stupid post.  Just like it is more convenient to not think too deeply about things.

I don't advocate running stop signs or red lights but I do it all the time, and I will continue to do it despite this short-sighted "crackdown" at this privileged intersection.  If you truly believe that cyclists being more courteous, not rolling stop signs, etc will significantly increase the number of riders in the city and get cyclists more protected lanes, you are living in a fantasy.         



Alkaline said:

^ yes that -2 is so mature. You realize that following the rules actually makes us look better over all and will lead to more support and less ass hattery from crappy columnists. It will also make it easier for us to get more protected lanes and be safer over all.

And not that it makes it better but I am sure the police officer who threatened probably had to deal with too many smug cyclists that think they are above the law when they are not. Is the extra 10 sec you save by not stopping really worth all the trouble it causes and the possible injury of a pedestrian? No.

Permalink Reply by Alkaline on August 24, 2012 at 8:44am

And if you think riding around like an entitled brat will do anything then you are as well

Zoetrope said:

I don't wan't the same rights or the same rules as cars.  I wan't different rules, because a car is not a bike and vice versa.  This is something that you and the plus one'rs will probably never get, sadly.  Read my other post above the last if you want to know how I feel.  I'm sure you probably have already and chose to reply to the snarky comment though, because it was more convenient for you to attack a stupid post.  Just like it is more convenient to not think too deeply about things.

I don't advocate running stop signs or red lights but I do it all the time, and I will continue to do it despite this short-sighted "crackdown" at this privileged intersection.  If you truly believe that cyclists being more courteous, not rolling stop signs, etc will significantly increase the number of riders in the city and get cyclists more protected lanes, you are living in a fantasy.         



Alkaline said:

^ yes that -2 is so mature. You realize that following the rules actually makes us look better over all and will lead to more support and less ass hattery from crappy columnists. It will also make it easier for us to get more protected lanes and be safer over all.

And not that it makes it better but I am sure the police officer who threatened probably had to deal with too many smug cyclists that think they are above the law when they are not. Is the extra 10 sec you save by not stopping really worth all the trouble it causes and the possible injury of a pedestrian? No.

Permalink Reply by Don on August 24, 2012 at 8:58am

The truth lies somewhere in the middle.  I agree that rules should be different for bicycles than they are for cars, and it's not a big deal when a cyclist rolls through a stop sign or light when the coast is clear.  Better than being stuck in the fray when the light turns green and cars and buses are jockeying for position, potentially right hooking, etc.  

BUT some people take it waay too far.  Blowing through at a high rate of speed when pedestrians or cars are present at the intersection, not obeying right of way rules, yelling at anyone who gets in their way even when they're totally in the wrong, etc.  Yeah I know it's not like this behavior is leading to carnage in the streets, but it does seem hypocritical when cyclists treat pedestrians or slower cyclists the same way cars treat cyclists.  As second class citizens who are just in the way.

Permalink Reply by Charlie Short 2.9 on August 24, 2012 at 9:24am

Thanks for this Cameron.

Here's a couple of details about the targeted enforcement that Bicycling Ambassadors do with police officers.

-They take place at high-crash (or high-complaint) intersections within Wards where an Alderman is concerned about safety (perceived or real.) We've conducted these events in about 14 wards, all at relatively high bike volume intersections (the 4th Ward doesn't have as many riders, but 31st and King has anywhere from 50 to 150 cyclists per hour on a good day.)

-All of the events take place at a variety of intersections and deal with a multitude of infractions. Officers are requested to not ticket anyone, only offer warnings. This year, we've handed out 869 warnings and 2 tickets to cyclists and 342 warnings to motorists and 39 tickets. In both cases of tickets being issued, we didn't work with those districts again. Last year we had 51 unique locations, this year, we'll have about same.

Here's a link to our informational website: http://www.bicyclingambassadors.org/str.html

Cameron Puetz said:

If you really believe that this behavior is not adversely impacting bike facilities then you are living in a fantasy world. Earlier in this thread people that I believe to be in the know stated that this intersection was singled out because of the number of complaints that the alderman among others has received. It's hard to believe that an alderman will continue to support types of infrastructure that bring in a lot of complaints. Additionally, the lack of respect for pedestrians has come up at every public input meeting about bike projects I've been to recently. There are people who oppose installation of protected bike lanes because they are difficult for pedestrians to cross, and they do show up to make their voices heard. Finally, why are we defending antagonizing pedestrians? These are complaints from pedestrians trying to cross the street at a marked cross walk with a stop sign. Share the road means you too.

 

Yes there are a lot of poorly designed intersections and bad signage on Kinzie, but that's not an excuse for the way a lot of people ride there. I hope that after Dearborn is completed CDOT applies any lessons learned with bike specific signage and signaling to intersection redesign on Kinzie to address the issues that separating cyclists from the normal traffic flow caused. However for that to work, there still has to be an improvement in rider behavior.



Zoetrope said:

I don't wan't the same rights or the same rules as cars.  I wan't different rules, because a car is not a bike and vice versa.  This is something that you and the plus one'rs will probably never get, sadly.  Read my other post above the last if you want to know how I feel.  I'm sure you probably have already and chose to reply to the snarky comment though, because it was more convenient for you to attack a stupid post.  Just like it is more convenient to not think too deeply about things.

I don't advocate running stop signs or red lights but I do it all the time, and I will continue to do it despite this short-sighted "crackdown" at this privileged intersection.  If you truly believe that cyclists being more courteous, not rolling stop signs, etc will significantly increase the number of riders in the city and get cyclists more protected lanes, you are living in a fantasy.         

 

Permalink Reply by David Barish on August 24, 2012 at 9:32am

Think comedy friends. The alderman and the officers delivered the straight line and it was up to the cyclists to deliver the punch line. Think baseball friends. This was a batting practice pitch waiting to be hit over the fence. They give us a protected lane. We obey the law when we are in it.  They are there. We stop.  They report that the overwhelming majority of cyclists made the stop and they go back to more mundane duties like catching criminals.  Opinion generators like John Kass have less fodder for their rants. The Ambassadors report how cool cyclists are. We all live happlily ever after.  If one gendarme was aggressive and foolish with language that should have gone in one ear and out other. Want to mess him up?  Stop and give him a high five. Or take a page out of the 1960's revolutionary handbook and stop and hand him a flower.   Or, simply stop. Smile.  Ride On. Happy cycling. This just was not one of those us against them moments.  We have  to pick better fights. This was not one of them.

Permalink Reply by Charlie Short 2.9 on August 24, 2012 at 9:33am

Thanks, and that's an excellent point.

h' said:

Charlie,

That's really great! At the risk of stating the obvious, I think the greatest value is that the Alderman can then come back to the bicycle infrastructure opponents and say "look, we did something." And that something doesn't involve removing bicycle infrastructure.

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service