Advocacy & Safety - Portland: Police Enforcement Downtown this Morning

It looked like the whole Traffic Division was out this morning in downtown. Numerous cyclists got tickets for brakeless fixies or for performing completely legal maneuvers such as leaving the bike lane to turn left.

Here's the link to the bikeportland.org story:

http://bikeportland.org/2006/08/02/cops-carry-out-enforcement-mission-on-morning-commuters/

Well, you and I may disagree about whether or not bicyclists should obey the traffic laws, but I completely agree with you about targetting cyclists-- where's the campaign targetting law-breaking motorists?

This smells of selective enforcement of the traffic laws, and therefore, discrimination against cyclists.

Just out of interest, what type of "ticket" is issued for a violation on a bicycle? I assume that these are not "moving violations" that end up on your regular driving record, are they? After all, a driver's license isn't required for riding a bike.

And I just saw a story on the news last night -- I think in Colorado? -- where they were going to enforce a 15-mph speed limit on the roads through a city park that are a favorite for bicyclists. Again, I wonder what type of citation this would be.

Numerous cyclists got tickets for ... leaving the bike lane to turn left.

Some of us are not surprised.

This is the system you promote, Brian? No thanks...

One of my coworkers got the ticket. He doesn't have a DL, just a state ID. It's a $242 ticket, same as for a moving violation in a motor vehicle.

What exactly did the ticket say?

One cyclist told me he was stopped by Officer Barnum (same guy involved with the Holland trial) and that the officer asked him why he chose to ride without a brake. As the rider explained how his bike worked and that it didn’t need a brake lever to stop, Officer Barnum asked, “What if your chain breaks?”

The cyclist has contacted a lawyer and plans to take the ticket to court.

The cop asked a good question.
More importantly, a fixie's "brake" (reverse power) is a rear brake, and, hence, not very effective.

Just out of interest, what type of "ticket" is issued for a violation on a bicycle? I assume that these are not "moving violations" that end up on your regular driving record, are they? After all, a driver's license isn't required for riding a bike.

And I just saw a story on the news last night -- I think in Colorado? -- where they were going to enforce a 15-mph speed limit on the roads through a city park that are a favorite for bicyclists. Again, I wonder what type of citation this would be.

In Ontario, it is a moving violation, and you can get pts on your license even if you do not have one. Then, if you get a license, you start with pts if they have not faded away yet. Bikes are vehicles, and you have the same responsibilities as other vehicles on the road, and pay the same penalties. The way most people seem to ride (based on what i read and see) most of them would not last a week if the cops put serious attention to enforcing those particular rules. Thankgoodness we are not forced in this jurisdiction to ride in bike lanes unless we need/want to, so getting ticketed for not being in one is not likely to happen.

The cop asked a good question.
More importantly, a fixie's "brake" (reverse power) is a rear brake, and, hence, not very effective.


All it has to do under Ontario law is lock the rear wheel. I believe if your control is good enough, all you have to do is a rear wheel bunny hop, reverse engines ( :) ) and lock the rear wheel. However, only a die hard or the uninformed would argue that a rear brake alone is as good as a strong front brake and a rear brake for balance used in combination.

Regarding what one does if the chain brakes, I would ask the following: what if a brake cable snaps, the brake shoe slips off the rim into the spokes, the cable tensioner nut on the caliper slips, the master cylinder on the cop car sticks, the cars brake pads shatter, the driver hits the gas and brake at the same time, or the cow jumps over the moon? The simple answer is that maintenance prevents these things, but then again, if someone is being a dumbass, I get sarcastic.

One cyclist told me he was stopped by Officer Barnum (same guy involved with the Holland trial) and that the officer asked him why he chose to ride without a brake. As the rider explained how his bike worked and that it didn’t need a brake lever to stop, Officer Barnum asked, “What if your chain breaks?”


So all of the millions of coaster brake bicycles out there are illeagal now? Who is going to compensate me for my 3. I demand a recall of all non hand brake bike immediately with full compensation!:p

Aaron:)

The cop asked a good question.
More importantly, a fixie's "brake" (reverse power) is a rear brake, and, hence, not very effective.


So is the coaster brake on my cruiser... Should all cruiser or coaster brake bikes be outlawed as "too dangerous?"

What exactly did the ticket say?

Violation of ORS 814.420

Let's keep the fixie brake discussion in the appropriate thread:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=214768

I'm more concerned about the other tickets that were being issued.

Just for the record, there is usually NO traffic enforcement downtown at all. I routinely see motorists downtown running lights, speeding, failing to signal and violating the rights of pedestrians. Then today all of a sudden out of the blue the police turn out in force downtown and start selective enforcement against bicyclists. How F'd up is that?

Violation of ORS 814.420

814.420 Failure to use bicycle lane or path; exceptions; penalty. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person commits the offense of failure to use a bicycle lane or path if the person operates a bicycle on any portion of a roadway that is not a bicycle lane or bicycle path when a bicycle lane or bicycle path is adjacent to or near the roadway.

(2) A person is not required to comply with this section unless the state or local authority with jurisdiction over the roadway finds, after public hearing, that the bicycle lane or bicycle path is suitable for safe bicycle use at reasonable rates of speed.

(3) A person is not in violation of the offense under this section if the person is able to safely move out of the bicycle lane or path for the purpose of:

(a) Overtaking and passing another bicycle, a vehicle or a pedestrian that is in the bicycle lane or path and passage cannot safely be made in the lane or path.

(b) Preparing to execute a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

(c) Avoiding debris or other hazardous conditions.

(d) Preparing to execute a right turn where a right turn is authorized.

(e) Continuing straight at an intersection where the bicycle lane or path is to the right of a lane from which a motor vehicle must turn right.

(4) The offense described in this section, failure to use a bicycle lane or path, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §700; 1985 c.16 §338; 2005 c.316 §3]





If your colleague was preparing to make a left turn, as claimed, your colleague will easily beat this ticket. However, if the purpose of the "enforcement" is to harass cyclists, the officer probably doesn't care about the fact that your colleague will beat the ticket; the mere fact that your colleague will have to appear in court serves the officer's purpose of harassing cyclists.

Hey! We've got ourselves enough cyclists to earn ourselves a crackdown!!! Hooray!

This will blow over and the people on the front lines will participate with the police to define where the lines actually are as the laws now stand. Fact is that there are many cyclists who break the law in the downtown area. Even my mom, who has been getting more and more into cycling, has complained about lawbreaking messengers and the like.

As for the bike lane thing: I don't think anyone has details, and when this is all over, our new law will be put to the test. If it doesn't look good, then we have an advocacy goal to shoot for and a strong advocacy group to do the shooting. If the new law is found to work, then we know we've done well. Depending on how you look at it (of course, being on the receiving end of a ticket is no fun), this is a good thing for Portland and will lessen tensions between drivers and cyclists in the long run. Portland is committed to cycling; that I have faith in. Drawing the lines to demonstrate exactly what is legal and what is illegal to do on a bike is exactly what is needed to mainstream cycling. To be mainstream, cycling cannot be laissez faire. No, the rules must be defined to all, and an enforcement crackdown is the easiest way of doing it which simultaneously gets advocacy groups, cyclists, drivers, police and judges in the same room together (both figuratively and literally) to hash things out.

The outcome, whether it is good or bad, depends on the reaction of this crackdown from all the groups listed above. For cycling to become mainstream, it has to follow some rules; becoming mainstream means losing some freedom. But I think it is well worth it. Mind you, I am not asking anyone to turn cheek and cower before authority. On the contrary, for this to come out right, everyone's got to play their roles. The cyclists involved should fight the tickets. The police officers should come to court to defend their issuance. There are a few prominent lawyers who specialize in traffic law as it pertains to cycling and they should wade into this without hesitation. This will be a good test of how serious Portland is about cycling. If it were serious, it would leap into this head first to define the laws as they stand and identify the law's shortcomings. The city must be committed to drawing the line. Once we come to agreement about where the line now stands, we can start a conversation about where it must be moved.

Let's keep the fixie brake discussion in the appropriate thread:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=214768

I'm more concerned about the other tickets that were being issued.

Just for the record, there is usually NO traffic enforcement downtown at all. I routinely see motorists downtown running lights, speeding, failing to signal and violating the rights of pedestrians. Then today all of a sudden out of the blue the police turn out in force downtown and start selective enforcement against bicyclists. How F'd up is that?

Are they also stopping motorists?

If your colleague was preparing to make a left turn, as claimed, your colleague will easily beat this ticket. However, if the purpose of the "enforcement" is to harass cyclists, the officer probably doesn't care about the fact that your colleague will beat the ticket; the mere fact that your colleague will have to appear in court serves the officer's purpose of harassing cyclists.

Hopefully, this is not just about harrassment. That gets us nowhere. Somehow I doubt it though - if it were, they should know that our advocacy groups are strong enough to cause some pretty good backlash. For sure, this will test how committed Portland is to cycling. Hopefully it will be instructive to all involved in a constructive way.

Just for the record, there is usually NO traffic enforcement downtown at all. I routinely see motorists downtown running lights, speeding, failing to signal and violating the rights of pedestrians. Then today all of a sudden out of the blue the police turn out in force downtown and start selective enforcement against bicyclists. How F'd up is that?I see it all the time, usually clueless suburbanites in the "big city" and totally confused about stop signs, street directions, bus lanes, talking on the phone and failing to notice that the light has changed from green to red, dooring cyclists because they haven't looked before opening their door... you name it. These are the "confused" motorists violating the traffic laws. Then there are the speeders, red light runners, you name it, who are intentionally violating the traffic laws. And as you point out, the police have never mounted a public safety campaign to nab these offenders.

I think there's something seriously wrong in the relations between the Police Bureau and the cycling community (and let's not even get into the relations between the Police Bureau and minority communities), and cycling advocates, such as BTA, need to work to change police relations with the cycling community-- to advocate for equal enforcement of the law, so that the police either turn a blind eye towards cycling violations, the same way they do with motoring violations, or start stepping up the campaigns against motoring violations.

Are they also stopping motorists?
I personally didn't see or hear about any enforcement against motorists. The police have claimed they were enforcing against all modes, but I have very strong doubts.

Hey! We've got ourselves enough cyclists to earn ourselves a crackdown!!! Hooray!

This will blow over and the people on the front lines will participate with the police to define where the lines actually are as the laws now stand. Fact is that there are many cyclists who break the law in the downtown area. Even my mom, who has been getting more and more into cycling, has complained about lawbreaking messengers and the like.

As for the bike lane thing: I don't think anyone has details, and when this is all over, our new law will be put to the test. If it doesn't look good, then we have an advocacy goal to shoot for and a strong advocacy group to do the shooting. If the new law is found to work, then we know we've done well. Depending on how you look at it (of course, being on the receiving end of a ticket is no fun), this is a good thing for Portland and will lessen tensions between drivers and cyclists in the long run. Portland is committed to cycling; that I have faith in. Drawing the lines to demonstrate exactly what is legal and what is illegal to do on a bike is exactly what is needed to mainstream cycling. To be mainstream, cycling cannot be laissez faire. No, the rules must be defined to all, and an enforcement crackdown is the easiest way of doing it which simultaneously gets advocacy groups, cyclists, drivers, police and judges in the same room together (both figuratively and literally) to hash things out.

The outcome, whether it is good or bad, depends on the reaction of this crackdown from all the groups listed above. For cycling to become mainstream, it has to follow some rules; becoming mainstream means losing some freedom. But I think it is well worth it. Mind you, I am not asking anyone to turn cheek and cower before authority. On the contrary, for this to come out right, everyone's got to play their roles. The cyclists involved should fight the tickets. The police officers should come to court to defend their issuance. There are a few prominent lawyers who specialize in traffic law as it pertains to cycling and they should wade into this without hesitation. This will be a good test of how serious Portland is about cycling. If it were serious, it would leap into this head first to define the laws as they stand and identify the law's shortcomings. The city must be committed to drawing the line. Once we come to agreement about where the line now stands, we can start a conversation about where it must be moved.I agree with you about following the rules. If messengers (and others) are flouting the law downtown, cite them. However, I'm also concerned that cyclists are being singled out for enforcement efforts when motorists aren't subject to the same level of enforcement. I think it's something BTA needs to work on with the Police Bureau.

I personally didn't see or hear about any enforcement against motorists. The police have claimed they were enforcing against all modes, but I have very strong doubts.One way they could prove equal enforcement would be to make public the number of tickets issued to cyclists and the number of tickets issued to motorists today in the targetted area. That data would speak volumes about what they were doing today.

I agree with you about following the rules. If messengers (and others) are flouting the law downtown, cite them. However, I'm also concerned that cyclists are being singled out for enforcement efforts when motorists aren't subject to the same level of enforcement. I think it's something BTA needs to work on with the Police Bureau.

Yes. And this give all involved a forum to do that talking. I feel for the cyclists who got the tickets though. What a pain in the a$$.

Fortunately there are lawyers and the BTA who are all over stuff like this. These lawyers are looking for test cases many times and this will provide fertile ground. Reading through the comments, it appears many of the bike lane violations were incorrect; if this is the case, then this will result in the rules being defined more exactly.

Drawing the lines to demonstrate exactly what is legal and what is illegal to do on a bike is exactly what is needed to mainstream cycling. To be mainstream, cycling cannot be laissez faire.
Laissez faire is not the alternative to determining "what is legal and what is illegal to do on a bike".

The alternative is to simply go by, "what is legal and what is illegal to do while operating a vehicle on the roadway".

Let's see. How possibly could the police have come to the conclusion that cyclists must never leave the bike lane? Could it possibly have to do with some cultural expectation that if a bike lane is striped on the road that the cyclist must use it? You'd think THE LAW would understand the law. Bike lanes must be magical :)

It looked like the whole Traffic Division was out this morning in downtown. Numerous cyclists got tickets for brakeless fixies or for performing completely legal maneuvers such as leaving the bike lane to turn left.

Here's the link to the bikeportland.org story:

http://bikeportland.org/2006/08/02/cops-carry-out-enforcement-mission-on-morning-commuters/

The brake on a fixie issue is just down right stupid. Just to see what would happen I ought to buy a used recumbent, turn it into a fixie, then come out to Portland to ride just to see what would happen. I'd love to see the anti-cyclist police try to issue me a ticket. I'd tear it up, stuff it in my pocket, don't want to get busted for littering, & throw it away later.

How in the hell are you supposed to make a left turn if you can not leave the bike lane? Who are these morons targeting cyclists? The modern day gestapo? How long before this **** filters into to other areas causing problems for more of us?

If your colleague was preparing to make a left turn, as claimed, your colleague will easily beat this ticket. However, if the purpose of the "enforcement" is to harass cyclists, the officer probably doesn't care about the fact that your colleague will beat the ticket; the mere fact that your colleague will have to appear in court serves the officer's purpose of harassing cyclists.Was he signalling his move and his lane change, out of curiosity?

One way they could prove equal enforcement would be to make public the number of tickets issued to cyclists and the number of tickets issued to motorists today in the targetted area. That data would speak volumes about what they were doing today.
Since the bicycle mode split is approximately 3% to 5%, I would expect these numbers to be 95:5, motorists to bicyclists.

Since the bicycle mode split is approximately 3% to 5%, I would expect these numbers to be 95:5, motorists to bicyclists.Yep.

I understand there was one known motorist who received a ticket for being in a bus-only lane. I have never been more grateful for going to work early today, as they were ticketing people on my route about 20 minutes after I got to work who were doing the exact same thing I do every day: use the far left lane on a one way street. Either the traffic police are extremely ignorant of Oregon law or this was a harassment campaign, or was at least turned into one by certain participating officers.

Oregon Revised Statute 814.430: Improper use of lanes; exceptions; penalty.

(1) A person commits the offense of improper use of lanes by a bicycle if the person is operating a bicycle on a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic using the roadway at that time and place under the existing conditions and the person does not
ride as close as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway.

(2) A person is not in violation of the offense under this section if the person is not operating a bicycle as close as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway under any of the following circumstances:

(a) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle that is proceeding in the same direction.
(b) When preparing to execute a left turn.
(c) When reasonably necessary to avoid hazardous conditions including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or other conditions that make continued operation along the right curb or edge unsafe or to avoid unsafe operation in a lane on the roadway that is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. Nothing in this paragraph excuses the operator of a bicycle from the requirements under ORS 811.425 or from the penalties for failure to comply with those requirements.
(d) When operating within a city as near as practicable to the left curb or edge of a roadway that is designated to allow traffic to move in only one direction along the roadway. A bicycle that is operated under this paragraph is subject to the same requirements and exceptions when operating along the left curb or edge as are applicable when a bicycle is operating along the right curb or edge of the roadway.
(e) When operating a bicycle alongside not more than one other bicycle as long as the bicycles are both being operated within a single lane and in a manner that does not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.
(f) When operating on a bicycle lane or bicycle path.

BRAVO to Portland police for facing up to these folks. I doubt BTA will come to their rescue. BTA is not there to support lawbreaking, they are there for safe bicycling and advocacy. And, yes, the police should definitely also sit in a bike lane some day and see what cyclists have to put up with too!!!!

I've worked in downtown Portland for 8 years now. Been almost mowed down by cyclists who stop for NOTHING. The worst thing is in two extremely close instances, the cyclists just kept right on riding--never stopped to see what they had done to me, never apologized. I am talking turning right into pedestrians crossing streets (they-pedestrians- had the right of way), riding on sidewalks around blind corners at high rates of speedm etc. There are more than a handful of cyclists who are really out of control...Advocacy is one thing. Being careless and stupid is another.

I've ridden thousands of miles, and love bicycling. But I don't consider these thoughtless riders my comrades.

BRAVO to Portland police for facing up to these folks. I doubt BTA will come to their rescue. BTA is not there to support lawbreaking, they are there for safe bicycling and advocacy.I agree, but I would not want to see the PPB harassing cyclists for breaking traffic laws and turning a blind eye towards other traffic scofflaws. If that's what the PPB is doing, the BTA should advocate for even-handed treatment.


And, yes, the police should definitely also sit in a bike lane some day and see what cyclists have to put up with too!!!!

I've worked in downtown Portland for 8 years now. Been almost mowed down by cyclists who stop for NOTHING. The worst thing is in two extremely close instances, the cyclists just kept right on riding--never stopped to see what they had done to me, never apologized. I am talking turning right into pedestrians crossing streets (they-pedestrians- had the right of way), riding on sidewalks around blind corners at high rates of speedm etc. There are more than a handful of cyclists who are really out of control...Advocacy is one thing. Being careless and stupid is another.

I've ridden thousands of miles, and love bicycling. But I don't consider these thoughtless riders my comrades.I don't either.

And I've had the same experiences with nearly being mowed down by a handful of jerks.

I agree about enforcing the law, but I disagree with any enforcement approach that targets cyclists while turning a blind eye towards motorists.

Regarding what one does if the chain brakes, I would ask the following: what if a brake cable snaps, the brake shoe slips off the rim into the spokes, the cable tensioner nut on the caliper slips, the master cylinder on the cop car sticks, the cars brake pads shatter, the driver hits the gas and brake at the same time, or the cow jumps over the moon? The simple answer is that maintenance prevents these things, but then again, if someone is being a dumbass, I get sarcastic.

That paragraph is a thing of beauty.

BRAVO to Portland police for facing up to these folks. I doubt BTA will come to their rescue. BTA is not there to support lawbreaking, they are there for safe bicycling and advocacy. And, yes, the police should definitely also sit in a bike lane some day and see what cyclists have to put up with too!!!!

I've worked in downtown Portland for 8 years now. Been almost mowed down by cyclists who stop for NOTHING. The worst thing is in two extremely close instances, the cyclists just kept right on riding--never stopped to see what they had done to me, never apologized. I am talking turning right into pedestrians crossing streets (they-pedestrians- had the right of way), riding on sidewalks around blind corners at high rates of speedm etc. There are more than a handful of cyclists who are really out of control...Advocacy is one thing. Being careless and stupid is another.

I've ridden thousands of miles, and love bicycling. But I don't consider these thoughtless riders my comrades.

I don't disagree with your complaints about some downtown cyclists. I'm sure that many think it's unfair to get a ticket for running a red light, blowing a stop sign, turning into pedestrians, or riding on the sidewalk (illegal in downtown Portland), but I'm fine with it. The fixie brake issue is another kettle of fish entirely, and way beyond the scope of this thread (or my ability to form a well-reasoned opinion). What's really not ok, and I think this is what has gotten so many in Portland upset, is the tickets that were given for performing completely legal manuevers.

I'm also somewhat disturbed at targeting cyclists when many motorists are doing illegal things, too. When's the last time you saw a driver downtown get pulled over for tailgaiting, cutting off, dooring, or threatening someone on a bike? In the 6 years I've worked downtown, I've never seen it. I've never even seen anyone pulled over for speeding, and there are some real maniacs out there that need a wake up call in the worst way.

I've got no problem with citations for traffic law violations. In fact, I welcome them. But consistently targeting 2 wheeled vehicles with no motor and nothing else on the road? You bet I'm going to complain and the BTA will advocate against unfair targeting. If you read the link Randya posted, you will see that the BTA executive director is implying just that.

. . . becoming mainstream means losing some freedom. . . .
Like using the traffic lanes?

To be fair, you did say that the cyclists should fight the tickets. And you are right, we need to wait until courts rule on the tickets for a final judgment. But if there were no bike lanes on the downtown streets, fewer cyclists would have tickets they have to fight.

All it has to do under Ontario law is lock the rear wheel. I believe if your control is good enough, all you have to do is a rear wheel bunny hop, reverse engines ( :) ) and lock the rear wheel. However, only a die hard or the uninformed would argue that a rear brake alone is as good as a strong front brake and a rear brake for balance used in combination.

Regarding what one does if the chain brakes, I would ask the following: what if a brake cable snaps, the brake shoe slips off the rim into the spokes, the cable tensioner nut on the caliper slips, the master cylinder on the cop car sticks, the cars brake pads shatter, the driver hits the gas and brake at the same time, or the cow jumps over the moon? The simple answer is that maintenance prevents these things, but then again, if someone is being a dumbass, I get sarcastic.


I see both sides here. The law is the law and if you're in compliance (by any means of braking energy) then one should not be ticketed.

However, purposely not having a back up system, (especially when you well being is at stake) IMHO is NOT a wise decission.

Every bike with freewheel gearing has both rear and front brakes. Three speed coaster brake bikes also have a front brake. Motorcycles have brakes on both ends and most if not all cars built post 1968 have dual system master cylinders... one for the front, one for the back so that you have some stopping power in the event of a failure.

We could bandy about 'What if' scenarios 'til Hector rots in his grave, but none of it will save your arse if your only system fails. As granddaddy always said... An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. ;)

Three speed coaster brake bikes also have a front brake.


Not all of them! I have an early 60's? Schwinn that came only with the coaster brake. I think it became "mandated" sometime after that. Probably by the CSPC trying to prevent darwinisms...I have a back up brake system...it is called my feet!

Aaron:)

Whatever works for you 'Fred' :)

There must not be much crime in Portland, OR.

Every bike with freewheel gearing has both rear and front brakes.

http://www.strictlybmx.com/images/mcnlyoung2.jpg
http://img.timeinc.net/bmx/content/images/volume_26/volume_26.jpg
http://www.bab.no/Varebilder/IMNB-720001021.jpg

The majority of BMX's sold these days have only a rear brake.
I've been in situations where my brake cable snapped, and simply foot jammed my rear tire to stop safely.
Yes, I ride a BMX in traffic.

There must not be much crime in Portland, OR.Bike theft is epidemic. Any guesses about what the PPB is doing about that?

I don't disagree with your complaints about some downtown cyclists. I'm sure that many think it's unfair to get a ticket for running a red light, blowing a stop sign, turning into pedestrians, or riding on the sidewalk (illegal in downtown Portland), but I'm fine with it. The fixie brake issue is another kettle of fish entirely, and way beyond the scope of this thread (or my ability to form a well-reasoned opinion). What's really not ok, and I think this is what has gotten so many in Portland upset, is the tickets that were given for performing completely legal manuevers.

I'm also somewhat disturbed at targeting cyclists when many motorists are doing illegal things, too. When's the last time you saw a driver downtown get pulled over for tailgaiting, cutting off, dooring, or threatening someone on a bike? In the 6 years I've worked downtown, I've never seen it. I've never even seen anyone pulled over for speeding, and there are some real maniacs out there that need a wake up call in the worst way.

I've got no problem with citations for traffic law violations. In fact, I welcome them. But consistently targeting 2 wheeled vehicles with no motor and nothing else on the road? You bet I'm going to complain and the BTA will advocate against unfair targeting. If you read the link Randya posted, you will see that the BTA executive director is implying just that.+1

I see both sides here. The law is the law and if you're in compliance (by any means of braking energy) then one should not be ticketed.

However, purposely not having a back up system, (especially when you well being is at stake) IMHO is NOT a wise decission.

Every bike with freewheel gearing has both rear and front brakes. Three speed coaster brake bikes also have a front brake. Motorcycles have brakes on both ends and most if not all cars built post 1968 have dual system master cylinders... one for the front, one for the back so that you have some stopping power in the event of a failure.

We could bandy about 'What if' scenarios 'til Hector rots in his grave, but none of it will save your arse if your only system fails. As granddaddy always said... An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. ;)


tbh, I am debating a fixie for giggles, but am more likely go go with a freewheel singlespeed. But I will be fitting it (the fixie) with brakes..... This is more for my own comfort level rather than to follow a law (since you can skid the rear wheel on a brakeless fixie and that is what the law here requires).

I've always wondered about this....I would think most fixie riders would affix a front brake to it, just to meet legality requirements. After all the braking effect on a fixed gear is not a dedicated braking device, and isn't that what the law is asking for?

Like using the traffic lanes?

To be fair, you did say that the cyclists should fight the tickets. And you are right, we need to wait until courts rule on the tickets for a final judgment. But if there were no bike lanes on the downtown streets, fewer cyclists would have tickets they have to fight.

I don't like the bike lanes downtown, though I love them on the high speed suburban roads I occasionally have to ride on. That aside, I am really, really annoyed by the tickets the police gave out to people who were using the traffic lanes legally when there was no bike lane on the street. We actually have very few downtown bike lanes (thank heavens).

According to Lt. Kruger, yesterday morning’s action:
23 citations to cyclists
17 citations to pedestrians
13 citations to vehicles
6 warnings
Post #64 at http://bikeportland.org/2006/08/02/cops-carry-out-enforcement-mission-on-morning-commuters/#comments

I don't like the bike lanes downtown, though I love them on the high speed suburban roads I occasionally have to ride on. That aside, I am really, really annoyed by the tickets the police gave out to people who were using the traffic lanes legally when there was no bike lane on the street. We actually have very few downtown bike lanes (thank heavens).
I use the Hawthorne Bridge to access downtown. The solid striped bike lane ends at SW 1st, but continues to SW 2nd w/ dashed line. I usually leave the bike lane at the west end of the bridge and move to the left lane (of a 2 lane one-way) at or before SW 1st, for four reasons:

1. RTOL for traffic turning right on SW 2nd. These motorists have to cross the bike lane to get into the RTOL, and many don't look for bicyclists.

2. Busses cross the bike lane to access a bus stop in the RTOL between SW 1st and SW 2nd.

3. Traffic in the right lane backs up at SW 4th due to high level of pedestrian activity at SW 4th, another bus stop between SW 4th and SW 5th, and many right turning motorists at SW 4th.

4. I need to make a left turn at SW 5th.

In other words, the last block of the bike lane (between SW 1st and SW 2nd) is unsafe due to traffic conditions, because of which I am legally allowed to leave the lane; and west of SW 2nd, there is no bike lane and I am legally allowed to use the left lane on the one way street. I didn't receive a ticket for doing what I do everyday yesterday, but I know several cyclists who did.

Yep, being in a bike lane in downtown Portland is like being locked up with homicidal maniacs most days...

Bike theft is epidemic. Any guesses about what the PPB is doing about that?

Uhhh, Let me guess,,,,Either nothing, or saying that "there's really nothing we can do". That was the general response from most departments back in the 70's. One time, a classmate of mine had a nice Fuji that was stolen. (This was before the advent or Kryptonite locks) The response from the campus PD? "You kids are paying three hundred dollars for a bike? That's crazy!". He never saw that Fuji again.

Bike lanes create more problems for cyclists than they solve (if they solve any at all).

Just say, "no thank you" to bike lanes.