Leebo

Pedaling home yesterday, I was stopped by a police officer on the Minuteman Bikeway. I had just crossed Lake street and the traffic was already stopped due to peds in the crosswalk. After slowing and looking both ways I proceeded without stopping and a conversation followed. He informed me that I should have stopped. I said the cars were already stopped for the peds in the crosswalk. I didn't argue but stated my case. He said he could give me a $ 20.00 ticket. I think he was more about informing bikers about the laws and keeping people safe than writing tickets. The conversation was mostly pleasant and I pedaled home.

mr_bill

They've been at Mill Street as well, and yes, it's informational.

-mr. bill

ItsJustMe

It's unclear what the situation is - stoplight, stop sign, etc? This is an international forum, hardly anyone here will have ever even been in Boston. In any case, even when there's no reason at all to stop, I still stop. I'm not afraid of extra training.

Leebo

There is a stop sign on the bikeway for bikes when it crosses a road. My point is that since the crosswalk was already occupied with pedestrians, and the cars were already stopped, I didn't see the need for me to stop as well. I looked both ways and rolled through it.

Hypno Toad

So, if you were on foot and entered the crossing without stopping, would the officer showed any interest? That's how I see your question, right? Does the path have a stop sign at the crossing? In Minnesota, people on foot or on bike are treated equal in a crossing.

In most cases, if the officer just wants to give me a warning, I like to say thank you and move on. However, I can see times where I'd be willing to engage in a conversation about the situation.

phoebeisis

This sounds like a much better than average LEO encounter.
He said you broke the law,but just gave you a casual warning?
Guessing folks-cars pedestrians-have been complaining about bike riders.
Recently I got a $194 ticket for gliding thru a stop sign in a car.
Yeah I did it-was in a hurry-yes I looked carefully-but missed the cop.
Yes it changed my driving habits.

Boston-last there in 1959- Bottom-Lees(sic) butterscotch coffee ice cream and coffee syrup are my fondest memories of Mass. People in other parts of the country aren't as big on coffee syrup and ice cream. Guessing that candy place is long gone-such good butterscotch!(Possible it was Providence RI I was very young)

demoncyclist

Coffee syrup would definitely be Providence. Autocrat is the big brand.

Digital_Cowboy

Sadly, I think that it is safe to say that at one time or another most of us cyclists have been stopped by LEOs. And even sadder is that in some of those cases it wasn’t warrented, and was simply the LEO harrassing us cyclists. Last year, I was stopped by a FHP officer. I think that it falls more into the category of harassment then it does him wanting to educate me/keep me safe. As he had Florida law totally wrong.

For instance he tried to tell me that since July of last year that the state of Florida no longer recognized the bicycle as a vehicle, he was of course wrong. He also tried to tell me that on roads without a bike lane that we were required to operate on the sidewalk, again he was wrong. He also tried to tell me that according to him that there was a black car behind me that had “almost hit me.” IF that was true, he should have stopped that alleged black car. As it is on the following vehicle NOT to hit the vehicle in front of it.

That’s not to say that all of the stops are harassment stops. There are plenty of cyclists out there who warrant being stopped, such as red light/stop sign runners. As there is a recent case up NYC where another cyclist allegedly traveling at a high rate of speed and attempting to set a personal best at Strava hit a woman who later died of her injuries. And sadly, this is NOT the first time that that has happened, and sadly I am sure that it will not be the last time that it happens. I could be mistaken, but it appears to me as if these cases are increasing.

So again, as I have asked in the past, if a person can stop for a red light or stop sign in their car why can’t they do the same when they are on their bicycle?

Yes, I’ve heard the “argument” that it costs us the energy from our moving forward, and that it costs us more energy to get started again. To that I have to say you all are just making excuses as most red lights and stop signs are visible before one has to actually stop. Therefore one has plenty of time to slow down, and downshift, provided that they are not riding either a single or fixed speed bike. IF one chooses to use either a single or fixed speed bike then that is their choice and does NOT give them the “right” to violate the rules of the road.

Leebo

I usually do stop there. 50 yds away is a traffic light and in the AM lots of elementary kids going to school around the corner. The cars were already stopped for the peds in the crosswalk. Maybe next time I'll go into ped mode like I do for some other intersections, jump off and walk.

rumrunn6

yeah I would have done the same thing

rumrunn6

too funny. up here they've had officer bicycle training to get the police up to speed on bicycle laws. cops in the town I work don't even know assault law, well, at least one did not

KD5NRH

Do they beat the crap out of them to teach them about assault?

mr_bill

They would just have to make the reasonable persons believe that they were going to be imminently beaten.

(I was a juror on an assault with a deadly weapon, to wit a replica "handheld lead projectile delivery device", case.)

The officers here know bike law. (And again, this wasn't oppression, this was education.)

FWIW, there are proposed changes coming to Minuteman Bikeway intersections. Some stop signs will be going away.

-mr. bill

rumrunn6

no, that would be "battery"

Leebo

Changes? Would be really interested in the updates. What parties are responsible for the MM bikeway?

mr_bill

See the draft report.

-mr. bill

KD5NRH

Well, Texas is a bit different in that there's no charge for "battery;" just "assault" or "aggravated assault" with various penalty groups for causing bodily injury and serious bodily injury, or causing the reasonable fear thereof. It's somewhat handy in that there's no legal distinction between nailing someone with a rock, and throwing the rock at them, but having them dodge in such a way that they still get injured, if a reasonable person could have foreseen the injury as a result of dodging the rock.

IOW, if you dodge the bottle thrown at you but fall off your bike, the guy who threw it is going to face the exact same charge as if he'd hit you with the bottle and caused similar injuries, though if you're lucky and the injuries are minor enough to carry a lower penalty group as an assault with injury, they may just skip over that bit and charge it as "deadly conduct" to get the class A misdemeanor without needing to show anything more than that the act recklessly placed someone in danger of serious bodily injury. ("Reckless" is enough for assault causing injury as well, but threatening (the requirement for assault without injury requires that it be done "intentionally" or "knowingly." Presumably, one could try to reduce the assault charge to littering or criminal mischief by claiming they were just throwing the bottle away and didn't see you there, or were throwing it at some inanimate object and you just happened to be in the way.)

Yeah, two of my HS friends are lawyers now, and one is the DA, so I've sat through a lot of long, drawn out explanations of the Penal Code, how it's applied, why it's sometimes applied in seemingly odd ways, and what a difference a seemingly innocuous change in wording can make.

rumrunn6

ah, interesting. no wonder cops are challenged to know the law ... I guess we really do need lawyers, huh? hahaha

Digital_Cowboy

NOW, I can agree with you, but when I was stopped and he was spouting his BS it wasn't so funny.

Do we want to know what happened?

spare_wheel

And I'm not afraid of jaybiking. In fact, I think it's often a *safer* choice than "training" by stopping for stop signs unnecessarily.

rumrunn6

nah ... it would hijack the thread

HIPCHIP

Bicyclists have to obey the same traffic laws as automobiles, so if you rolled through a stop, then he had the right to stop you and issue a citation. Maybe unnecessary, but legal. Once you've spent time handling an accident where someone was seriously injured or killed, as an officer, you start enforcing violations you know can cause an injury or death, so the officer may just have seen too many incidents too.

mr_bill

*OR*, the officer might have been part of an educational effort, since pretty much I'm the *one* who stops for the stop signs on the Minuteman. There might be another one, or two, besides me. But that's what they were doing at a couple of, how shall we say, generally ignored stop signs?

(And, they've been *also* there with educational effort for the motorists who don't know how to yield, no matter how many rectangular rapid-flashing beacons are installed.)

-mr. bill

HIPCHIP

To a certain extent, all citations are for educational efforts since they educate the person and all those who see the cite being issued.