gregf83 

1am on a quiet night. Better than sitting in the donut shop. I'm sure they would have left if there had been a call for something more important and I'm sure they didn't expect it to take so long to write a ticket for a cyclist.

Again, consider what you would expect police to do if you ran a red light in a car. They are very unlikely to let you go just because you don't pull over for them. Not sure why a cyclist should expect different treatment.

LesterOfPuppets

The Vancouver Washington Police use the all ages bicycle helmet law as an ersatz Stop and ID statute for bare-headed cyclist. There are hundreds of stops per year but few, if any actual tickets written for cycling without a helmet.

The main goal of the stops is to harass homeless cyclists downtown.

kickstart

Well if its because they intend to issue a citation, and the person can't or won't satisfactorily identity themselves, should they just be given a pass? Is it unreasonable to suspect them of trying to evade other issues?

genec

First due to the potential damage that a cyclist might cause due to the low weight and mass of that vehicle and rider vice an automobile... The violations are only similar in statute, not in reality. Second there is no requirement for an operator's license... so at best the police might want to give a ticket, but perhaps a severe lecture and warning are more in line.

genec

And I suspect the main goal of this stop (of the thread) was not really due to the need to enforce traffic law.

genec

Is it reasonable to subject one to such harassment for such a minor offense? We are pulling at either ends of the same rope here. This all involves personal rights verses police power... and what a common person might consider reasonable.

Chris516

It isn't 'all the rage'. It is still a very evident problem. From Ferguson to Baltimore, everywhere in between, and beyond.

Also, She did not go through a red light. The light was amber(yellow in the U.S.).
She didn't run a red light.

gregf83 

Could be some he said/she said but whether the light is red or Amber you are required to stop. There is some leeway on an amber if you aren't able to stop safely but the window for that to apply to a slow moving bicycle is very short. Bottom line Amber or red doesn't make any difference.

gregf83 

The primary reason for issuing a ticket would be for the cyclist's safety not their risk to others. As you note, a woman on a bike riding slowly on the street isn't likely to hurt anyone. We do have an issue, however, with accidents in intersections involving cyclists and vehicles. The cyclist always loses. Blowing through red lights at 1am in the downtown core is foolish particularly if you do it in front of a police car. I wouldn't do it even without the police car being present and don't have a problem with the officers handing out a ticket. I expect them to use discretion and not make a big deal if the streets are deserted but that doesn't appear to be case here.

Not sure what you mean by 'operator's licence' but I don't think it is relevant here. Bikes and vehicles have to abide by the same laws and as far as I know the penalties are the same.

Cyclists in our city, Vancouver, are often maligned with ignoring traffic laws. I think this is mainly applicable to a small number of individuals but I think it's important to not piss off the public in general as we rely on the elected city officials to approve new cycling infrastructure. No complaints here as Vancouver continues to be supportive of cycling but it's important for cyclists to do their part as well and that includes riding in a responsible manner and accepting the consequences of violations without too much crying, screaming or whining. No sympathy for the woman in this case.

wphamilton

I don't see it. Seriously, which states require documentation?

Does anyone know why the lady in Toronto didn't want to stop or identify herself? What was her excuse?

kickstart

Someone throws trash in your front yard, kids play loud music late at night in the park across the street, another puts their recycle bins in the bike lane, a motorist parks in front of a bike rack, street person uses the entrance to your business as a toilet............."minor offences" can add up to a big mess if allowed to run unchecked.
All "minor offences" get a free pass all the time?.........or just when a cyclist is involved?

Chris516

Then, That invariably is similar to another judgment call. That of AFRAP. Here in Maryland. While 'as close as practicable' is still in the language of the traffic code. This year, signs saying '(bike symbol)MAY USE FULL LANE' have been posted on the roads. All three are a judgment call, on the part of the cyclist.

TheManShow

This video starts with the women already being handcuffed, she "appears" to be resisting, and trying to fight off the officers even thought she is in handcuffs.

Where I recede if a cop notifies you you are under arrest, and you resist or fight in any way the officer can charge you with resisting arrest.

Will the DA, City Attorney, or State or Federal Prosicutor file charges and take you to court, and put you on trail for resisting arrest that is something that is decided upon a case by case basis.

But some Cops are jerk or other bad thing, and if tghey pull you over they are going to write you as ticket, no matter what you say.

Sign the ticket, it only says you will appear in court on the day the tickets say to appear. It is not an admission of guilt.

If you feel the Officer violated your Civil Rights than you need contact the local F.B.I. Office, and file a Civil Right Complaint against the officer. Most of the time these complains are investigated, and if an officer has a history of many of these complains the F.B.I. will sometime go to the U.S. Attorney on a bad apple officer.

Last I will say some police agencies do have internal affair department with in the department that also takes complainist very serious against their officers. I am not sure how it is today, but back when I was living in Los Angeles CA. Most of the LAPD officers I personall knew who work for the LAPD had a fear of their IA Division who investigasted all complains against officers, and ended the careers of many bad apples.

jeichelberg87

You must be completely clear of the intersection prior to the light turning red.

I-Like-To-Bike

My guess: High Drama.

genec

No, minor offenses do not get a free pass all the time... but they don't require handcuffs either. Rarely if ever are the offenses you mentioned treated in a manner that requires handcuffs... in fact good luck getting enforcement for many of those issues.... and any response from LEOs is most likely going to result in a lecture and warning to the offender... again, NO HANDCUFFS.

genec

You may be required to provide documentation in the red states shown below.

TheManShow

I live in a RED State on map above, I carry when cucling a photo copy of my Driver License, and a Photo Copy of my VA (Department of Veterans Affairs) Healthcare ID.

I have never had no Cop, Fuzz, Pig, Man, or any LEO stop me while riding my bicycle. If they do i will stop and address them by their title Officer, Deputy, or Patrolmen.

Respect deserves respect, asnd if you try and run from the Cops on your bicycle you will be treated like the criminal your are acting like.

JMHO.

FBinNY 

I don't know about other states but, for example, in New York, having to identify yourself is different than having to carry legal proof of that identity. Usually your name, address and birth date or other info, is enough for the officer to radio back and have someone confirm. I've gotten away with my name, address and phone number.

To ask for anymore than that, the officer would need to have something arrestable, in which if you can't prove your identity he'd arrest and let the desk staff take over.

Though it's not shown in the video clip, I suspect that the issue in this case, wasn't that she couldn't prove her identity, but that she refused to provide anything until in hand cuffs.

On a side note --- many of the cases like this show the importance of knowing how to talk to police. There's no percentage in refusing to cooperate up to a point, such as giving your true name, since not doing so only makes things worse. If you let resentment drive your actions, then you make the cop resent that, and things go downhill fast, especially with green cops. So many of these cases, regardless of the right and wrong, are cases where the victim brought it on themselves to an extent.

10+ year veteran cops have been down this road before and generally explain that if you don't give your name, they'll have to arrest, so it's your call. Green cops haven't mellowed, so they skip the preface and go straight to arrest.

AlmostTrick

I find no such wording to validate this claim in the Illinois vehicle code. We have this:

Along with wording that prohibits entering an intersection on red. (Of course)

But nothing requiring being completely clear of the intersection prior to the signal turning red.

Drivers getting a green light are also required to make sure the intersection is clear before they are allowed to proceed.

kickstart

Because the person identifies themselves in a satisfactory manner without resistance.......which is the whole point.......cooperate and get a citation or lecture........resist and and get cuffed or hauled off to the station.

Votre choisr

asmac

1. The Highway Traffic Act in Ontario requires cyclists to identify themselves if requested by providing their correct name and address. The argument seems to be that she says she did this and the police say she didn't.
2. Amber lights are a gray area so to speak. I know that cars making a left turn with their nose in the intersection when the light turns amber (perhaps behind someone else turning left) will be ticketed if they don't clear the intersection before the light turns red. It's a judgment call and if she cruised through the light next to a police car on a stale amber I expect she (or I) would be stopped.
3. This was on a busy main street, two traffic lanes each way, separated streetcar tracks in the middle, parking at the sides and complicated u-turn, left turn and transit signaling.
4. A complicating factor is Toronto's "carding" policy which disproportionately targets black youth (think NYC's 'stop & frisk'). It's a very controversial policy and people are told that they have the right to walk away if they are being carded -- there is no obligation to cooperate. Perhaps she confused the two things (traffic stop and carding) and wanted to assert her rights.

All in all I agree that it's better to step back and stay cool for all involved especially over a minor issue. Nonetheless, if you tell the police to get lost, especially when they are within their rights, it probably won't end well for you or me or her.

FBinNY 

+1, in NYS and most states an amber light (on a 3-light signal) is legally a green light, except with advance warning that it's ending. It gives drivers a chance to assess their braking distance, or time to the intersection and make an intelligent (hopefully) decision to brake and come to a safe stop, or proceed through. The hope is that it can prevent hard braking and tail end collisions, and it seems to work.

Of course, some people far from the intersection interpret an amber as "hurry up and race to the intersection before the light changes".

wphamilton

That's the way it is here also (Georgia). You may be required to identify yourself, but no documentation is required, even though it's red in the map. I suspect that the map is due to a misunderstanding of the difference.

howsteepisit

Who developed the map?