The Chainlink

What should CPD enforce?

There appears to be no poll functionality here, but I'm curious. Given probably limited resources to throw and bike issues, how do you think the Chicago Police Department should prioritize bike-related traffic "situations"? I'll throw out a few possibilities that come to mind.

  • Cyclists who run red lights
  • Cyclists who fail to come to a complete stop at stop signs
  • Drivers who make turns without signaling
  • Drivers who double-park in bike lanes
  • Cyclists who speed on LFT
  • Drivers who speed a little bit (say, 32 in a 30 zone)
  • Drivers who fail to come to a complete stop at stop signs

This is front-and-center in my mind because there were all sorts of warnings during the North Shore Century yesterday that the police in Fort Sheridan and Highland Park were ticketing riders for failure to stop at stop signs and riding three or more abreast. I'm sure they were mostly responding to resident complaints, but I couldn't help but feel they were being a bit opportunistic. Fines were reported to be between $120 and $150 per infraction. That's $450 in the old coffers for riding three abreast!

Views: 1531

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by ad on September 23, 2013 at 3:41pm

I'd argue discretionary enforcement is an important--and necessary--part of law enforcement in a wide variety of contexts.  Even the Illinois Supreme Court has recognized peace officers have discretion as to what traffic laws to enforce in the field.  So to say "anything that is law should be enforced" simply doesn't mesh with how a police officer's duties are viewed under this State's laws.  

Whatever a person's position on Idaho stops or riding three abreast might be, most people--and luckily most law enforcement officers on group rides similar to the NSC that I've been on--would agree that requiring each and every cyclist to stop at a stop sign during or ride only two riders side-by-side on a ride like NSC is unrealistic and potentially dangerous.  It is not asking too much for an area's law enforcement to recognize such distinctions and exercise discretion in enforcement without re-writing laws, and it's more than justified to get upset and ask questions when they do fail to recognize such distinctions.    

notoriousDUG said:

Bingo.

I'm going to grab some popcorn and watch the unreasonableness grow here though...

igz said:

anything that is law should be enforced, however, a number of these obviously need to be reviewed and revised.

Permalink Reply by Sarah D. on September 23, 2013 at 3:42pm

+ a million.

Everyone I know will laugh, but man, that is my biggest pet peeve. And Dana, it *IS* a law. Front white headlamp that is visible from a minimum distance of 500 feet. 

Come on, people.

dana said:

They should enforce the requirement to ride with lights at night.  Not sure if this is officially a law, but it's quite possibly the single thing that would increase rider safety if enforced.  Just some common sense...

Permalink Reply by Maurice on September 23, 2013 at 3:43pm

I agree with the post quoted below.  Saying that police should enforce all the laws is meaningless.  That would be impossible and not even necessarily desirable.  Punish the people who are doing dangerous things and leave the rest alone.

 

Will G - 10mi said:

I think a reasonable argument could be made that, given limited resources, the police could(/should?) focus on enforcing the laws that, when broken, will result in the worst outcome.

Permalink Reply by WillG on September 23, 2013 at 3:56pm


igz said:

  • Drivers who speed a little bit (say, 32 in a 30 zone) (does traffic and poor traffic light management even warrant this as a concern?)

Yes. I know that there are stretches of Clark, especially between Irving Park and Montrose, where drivers regularly go 50 mph. It's like once they get passed that light heading north at Paulina, let's just floor it and hope for the best!

Also, Foster, west of Ashland is dicey with respect to speeders as well. I hate that it is essentially off limits to cyclists as a result.

Permalink Reply by igz on September 23, 2013 at 3:59pm

50 mph is a brazen violation of the law and should be enforced regardless.  and my previous comment about it was stated half jokingly.  i know there are spots where people could speed. but thats an exception to the norm, really.

Permalink Reply by Skip Montanaro 0mi on September 23, 2013 at 4:06pm

I find Broadway north of Hollywood to be problematic for cyclists. Clark between Ashland and Devon can be dicey as well. Southbound from Devon and northbound from Ashland it widens from two to four lanes, which seems to be the signal for many drivers that they have just entered a freeway.

I agree about the selective enforcement. Ticketing drivers for 32 in a 30 makes about as much sense to me as ticketing a cyclist for an Idaho stop at a four-way stop. Driving 45 in a 30 or blowing through a four-way stop on a bike are different stories.

Permalink Reply by David Barish on September 23, 2013 at 5:41pm

Skip

Your sane  reply reveals the difficulty with your original post. Common sense is called for.  Users of the public way who do stupid and dangerous things should get a ticket, or worse.  By the book enforcement may keep people in line but is likely a waste of resources and may lead to inefficient movement of traffic.  The best we can hope for is common sense while understanding that there will be times when the gendarmes feel a need to strictly enforce things because of either citizen complaints of a perceived problem or an actual outbreak of bad behavior.  In that regard I think riding three abreast is obnoxious unless the road has been closed ala Bike the Drive or La Vuelta a Espana.

Cyclists need to exercise common sense as well. That being said there will be  a time when you will be stopped for rolling through a sign.  If you did so at a bad time you deserve what you get. if you did so at a lightly traveled time you should get a conversation. That may or may not happen. 

Skip Montanaro 12mi said:

I find Broadway north of Hollywood to be problematic for cyclists. Clark between Ashland and Devon can be dicey as well. Southbound from Devon and northbound from Ashland it widens from two to four lanes, which seems to be the signal for many drivers that they have just entered a freeway.

I agree about the selective enforcement. Ticketing drivers for 32 in a 30 makes about as much sense to me as ticketing a cyclist for an Idaho stop at a four-way stop. Driving 45 in a 30 or blowing through a four-way stop on a bike are different stories.

Permalink Reply by Rich S on September 23, 2013 at 10:29pm

The problem with discretion is inconsistent enforcement. I like that cops don't pull me over and ticket me when I run a red light even though I do so carefully and only when the intersection is clear. That being said I can't complain if one of these days a cop decides to ticket me. However inconsistent application of the law leaves everyone confused as to what is acceptable. 

I'd rather a driver go 32 and pay attention to the road than 30 and pay attention to their speedometer! 

Permalink Reply by Tom Dworzanski on September 24, 2013 at 12:07am

  • Cyclists who speed on LFT

Is this against the law? What's the speed limit?

Permalink Reply by Duppie on September 24, 2013 at 8:24am

That's not applicable to Chicago, the topic of discussion being what rules should the Chicago Police Department enforce

Bert Travis said:

Don't forget the only decent idea the mighty quinn came up with is that bikes can ride through a red light if there's no traffic because we can't trip the magnetic detectors to draw a green light.

Permalink Reply by Skip Montanaro 0mi on September 24, 2013 at 8:25am



Tom Dworzanski said:

  • Cyclists who speed on LFT

Is this against the law? What's the speed limit?

Good question. I don't know if there is an actual speed limit. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't some long forgotten safety or endangerment statute which could be pulled out of a dusty drawer and applied if necessary.

Permalink Reply by Tom Dworzanski on September 24, 2013 at 9:18pm

Thanks for posting that Peter.

What the heck is this about:

9-120-020  Registration.

It is hereby made the duty of the owner of every bicycle, before operating or permitting the operation of the same upon any public way within the city, to register said vehicle with the commissioner of police on a form provided for such purpose.
Registration may be accomplished by filing the registration record or form, duly filled out, in the office of the commander of the police district in which the bicycle owner resides, or by mailing said form, duly filled out, postage prepaid, to the commissioner of police.

RSS

Groups

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

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service