CB HI

Some of those nerds on trikes fought hard and gave much to protect your Constitutional freedoms.

https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org...dier-ride.aspx

Most people I have met that talk so dismissively of our freedoms have done nothing to protect them. They lay down and expect others to do the heavy lifting.

wphamilton

We've all probably experienced something similar, and that's the true common denominator. It resonates, regardless of whether we think OP acted distastefully. At least he stood his ground. You don't have to fight, or martyr yourself for the cause, nor battle headlong against City Hall. Just stand up for your rights.

Pedaleur

What a tool.

corvuscorvax

They had flags on their trikes.

Digital_Cowboy

Agreed, it sounds as if the cop was the one who was trying to escalate things. And it also sounds as if the cop was hoping that the OP would take the "bait" as it were. And I think that that was also part of his (the cops) "logic" in calling for "backup" on a simple traffic stop.

I mean as has been asked what other point was there in calling for "backup" on a simple traffic stop of a man on a trike, and not only a trike, but a 'bent trike at that?

kalliergo 

"I shill for jackbooted thuggery and I'm proud of it."

Digital_Cowboy

What is your basis for your conclusion? Here we have an American Citizen behaving in a lawful manner. And is stopped by a cop or cops who for whatever reason has/have a problem with people engaging in activities that they either don't like or understand. So they attempt to bully and/or harass law abiding citizens engaging in said legal activities.

Hoping that they give them some sort of excuse to escalate things to the point where they're justified in using violence to "apprehended" the vile, unrepentant "criminals."

Bekologist

all slow moving vehicles have a general duty to keep as far to the right as safe in most states. this allows vehicles to remain within a lane, or only partially move into an adjacent lane to pass. I'm not sure there's any states that technically require vehicles fully change lanes to pass, except recent laws for moving over while passing emergency vehicles.

Some states allow bicyclists to control lanes unsafe to share. connecticut is not a state with this explicit allowance for bicyclists.

Digital_Cowboy

Please explain to us just what crime(s) the OP committed that warranted being stopped in the first place?

In the first encounter he was walking home from work. Is that a crime? If not then why was he stopped and asked for his drivers license? Was he driving when he was stopped?

What crime did he commit in the second encounter? Given that again he wasn't driving a car why was he asked for his drivers license? And in the second encounter why did the LT "need" to call in backup?

If you want to sit there and meekly answer every question put to you when you've done nothing wrong that is your business. But when one is out and about in public on a public road not doing anything illegal or inappropriate what is the probable cause for stopping them?

Digital_Cowboy

Very good question. As I've asked before if we do not stand up for our rights (and there are several of us here who were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to protect ALL American's rights) do we still have those rights?

Digital_Cowboy

Just how do you think that the erosion of our rights start? They begin with cops stopping people who are going about their business in a legal manner. And demanding that they explain what they're doing and why they're doing it.

In both encounters what business was it of the cops as to why he was walking, or riding a trike without a flag? Do YOU have a safety flag on your bicycle? If not, why not?

And please explain to us why a US Citizen who is lawfully going about their business need to be stopped by a cop on an ego trip? Who is quite probably only making the stop because (again to quote "Dirty Lyle")

"I am the law. Don't you understand, I represent the law."

Sadly there are too many cops who have this attitude.

Or to look at it this way.

You're sitting at home enjoying a cold beverage on your front porch. A cop sees and decides to stop and ask you what you're doing, and why. What is your response going to be? Should a cop be able to walk up to you in your own yard minding your own business enjoying a cold beverage and harass you?

smasha

my advice to the OP and anyone else in a similar situation... it doesn't matter what your experience or credentials are. it doesn't matter if you're written books on the topic. it also doesn't matter if you're a high-school drop-out and riding a bike to your job at a burger-place.

here's what matters when it gets to court: have a copy of your state DOT's (or equivalent in your jurisdiction) handbook for bicyclists. it should clearly state the rules for keeping right (left, where i am) and should also make it clear that you should NOT be too close to the kerb. it will point out reasons why (visibility, debris, etc).

if this isn't clear in your state DOT's bicycling handbook, refer to the handbooks of bordering states. i'd be surprised if any states don't have this sorted by now.

without this documentation, the judge (who probably isn't a bicyclist) may listen to the police officer's "expertise" on the matter. with this documentation, you've got an easy win (unless the judge has issues with bicyclists).

edit: also, the cop's attitude requires that a formal complaint be filed with his supervisor. i've done this in NJ (with my dad) when a cop forgot to leave his attitude in his locker at work, and the supervising officer was really cool with us.

sudo bike

I think the point is, it depends on what you want to walk away from the encounter with. You certainly have every right to "flex your rights" and send a message. But if the goal in mind is simply to get the encounter over with as quickly as possible with minimal time/effort/money wasted, that probably isn't always the way to go.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'll draw lines. If a cop asks me if he can search my vehicle, it is always a firm "No, sorry. It's nothing personal, I just never consent to searches". And I'm willing to put up with any crap that causes in that case because I've seen far too many people get busted on stuff that wasn't even their fault from that (one guy lent his car to a friend the month before, and he left a roach under the seat and forgot about it. The owner consents to a search at a traffic stop later, cop finds it, guess who gets busted.) But if a cop just asks me what I'm doing, I'm OK waiving my rights in this situation to answer and play along. We all have different things we are comfortable doing, and it is a personal choice if you want to flex your rights or if you choose to waive them. The important thing is that you know the consequences (anything you say can be used against you, blah, blah, blah).

I'd also note whoever said it earlier was wise in noting that when cops pull you over for BS, the longer that encounter goes the higher the chance they will either find a ticketable offense or trick you into incriminating yourself/giving probable cause. Often times, getting the encounter over with is wise.

Again, I don't think this is a case where you should do A or B necessarily, just that doing A or B will give you different outcomes. Depends what you want out of it. Personally, I just want to go home and don't want to mess with it. I'll waive what rights I am comfortable waiving to speed things up so I can get home (and possibly call to file a complaint if I feel there was unprofessional behavior). If you or anyone else isn't, that's OK, but I don't think anyone has a civic duty to push the envelope with their rights at every opportunity.

$.02.

Bekologist

I find it very interesting the original poster choose to mislead in his original blog post about his getting a ticket -

he posted a "bikes may use full lane" sign and below this, "This is the law. State police should know this"

problem is, that's not the 'law' in Connecticut. Bicyclists have a duty in Connecticut to share the road safely and operate right safely to share lanes of traffic. there's nothing in the law that states 'bikes may use full lane'. bicyclists may use the full lane if reasonably necessary, but it's not an absolute or the default position.

The tricyclists overstates his road rights. the story reads like a loaded bucket of mud.

the 'bikes may use full lane' crowd contains a few misguided militant bicyclists, obdurate as their own solitary critical mass.

phoebeisis

Still curious if encounter #1 brought on encounter #2?
And where in the world does he live that cops have this much time on their hands? Must be a low crime city-affluent people etc.

Bekologist

I think there are, generally, two ways to position yourself when riding a bicycle.

!) Reasonably, maturely and with a nod to your duty of care as a road user. Taking the lane when reasonably necessary for your safety, to avoid debris, parked cars, etc;

or

2) like a road hog, in your face, confrontational, unnecessarily obstructing traffic and looking to be pulled over.

two distinctly different styles of riding, despite the lane positions differing only slightly. I'm very much into appropriate lane use and lane control, and am unabashed about controlling the lane when necessary.

Did so the other day thru a 55mph traffic zone on a four lane state highway necked down to two lanes, and ride well into the lane for visibility, etc. However, i understand how to share the road as a vehicular cyclist.

Paul Barnard

Yes!

Paul Barnard

Yes!

Paul Barnard

You contradicted yourself. Bicyclists may in fact use a full lane. If the OP explained why he thought it wasn't practicable to ride further right I didn't see it, so he may not have been legally doing so at the time.


Most enforcement academies that I am aware of teach the value of deescalation. Some cops don't get it and some cops have a bad day sometimes. Some cops don't understand bicycling law as well as we do. Here's the bottom line for me, and you are welcome to call me a wuss. I have never been stopped by a heavy handed cop. If I were, I wouldn't take it as an occasion to assert my rights. I WOULD DEESCALATE. Because in the end, I want the contact to end favorably for me. If you think it's your patriotic duty to assert your rights, set the cop straight or educate the cop on how the law really reads, knock yourself out. I think it makes for interesting forum fodder.

AFTER the contact had ended I would take the opportunity to visit with the cop's supervisor to discuss the situation.

SpecialX

I've done that before.. Really POs the officer that harassed you....
BUT.. And this is a huge but, it gives you the "power" to continue riding in your own (lawful) style..

After my last encounter, of said nature AND making the phone call AND sending an email to chief of police AND sending a written letter to the mayor of such town, I've NEVER had a problem since...

And I ride it that town even more so than I would normally do, just to "flex my rights".. Should I ever get pulled over (and harassed) again, I have the perfect rationale/documentation/proof for a harassment case against the officer, police department and town.

Paul Barnard

To be fair, we are only hearing one side of the story. I'd like to hear the officer's side of the story. There may have in fact been legal justification for the cops to have initiated contact in both cases.

Paul Barnard

You've watched that silly online video haven't you? The few times I have been stopped, I didn't hesitate to volunteer information. It has worked out very well for me.

atbman

Out of mild curiosity, I looked up CT cycle law and nowhere does it explicitly state that cyclists can or may use the full lane. It merely says that you should keep AFRAP unless except when (1) making a left turn pursuant to subsection (b) of section 14-241, (2) overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (3) overtaking and passing pedestrians, parked vehicles, animals or obstructions on the right side of the highway, and (4) when the right side of the highway is closed to traffic while under construction or repair.

It may be that there are CT legal precedent cases confirming that riders can take the lane. Are there any CT residents/legal experts who could confirm whether or not this is the case?

phoebeisis

Our OP has been holding out on us-THIS is why the 3 cars !

"A long-time student of the martial art of Aikido, Dr. Jenkins has received his shodan rank from the United States Aikido Federation. He trains at the Litchfield Hills Aikikai, under the direction of Laura Pavlick Sensei."

Cop 2-and maybe Cop 1 would have known ALL this since it took me maybe 20 seconds to find it.He would have set off Cop #1's jerkometer-Cop #1 passes this on to guys at station.
Yeah-they would have read him in about 2 seconds.


According to Bekologist OP was deceptive in the original blog-(posting the sign from another state)
AND-certainly a bit deceptive when he implied he was a mild mannered unthreatening Chiropractor-not requiring 3 cars. Left out the 1000's hours of martial arts.

Many cops participate in Martial Arts-so they will be very familiar with their fellow martial arts types-hence 3 cars.

mocolotion is on the right track- but our Walter Mitty has actually been PREPARING for these battles he brings on-martial arts training-and mongoose lawyer wife to bail him out.

Once the cops realized he was a talker not a fighter ( mommy arrived)-they left.Now that they know this they will leave him alone.

Paul Barnard

There have been plenty of other lane use discussions on this forum. I'm not going to get into it here as it tends to be a thread killing topic. Feel free to start a new thread on CT lane use law.