Myosmith

I completely disagree with the no harm, no foul ideology. I'm not for ticketing every little infraction, but same offense = same fine. Damages from causing harm are a civil matter, not a matter for traffic or criminal law. No harm, no foul is like saying I should be able to drive my car at 100 mph through a school zone as long as I don't hit anyone. Reasonable deterence to blatant disregard for public safety, regardless of outcome of the action, should be the goal of ticketing motorists, cyclists, or even pedestrians. If you apply the no harm, no foul ideology across the board, that would mean that motorists should be able to pass cyclists as close and as fast as they want as long as they don't make contact, drive in bike lanes and make blind right hook turns as long as we don't actually get hit.

IMHO tickets should be issued for blatant disregard of public safety with officers having the discretion to issue warnings for lesser offenses or offenses in low risk situations ie. slow-n-go a stop sign in a quiet residential area with no cross traffic = blip on the siren and a finger shake; blow a stop sign without looking with no cross traffic = stop and warn; blow through stop light in traffic resulting in cross traffic having to brake and narrowly missing pedestrians in crosswalk = ticket.

I'm also all for law enforcement protecting the rights and safety of cyclists and other non-motorized traffic/pedestrians through warnings and ticketing for actions which put cyclists at risk or for intentional harrassment.