kuan
09-28-07, 07:13 PM
Get to a stop sign, do a 360, and then go through. You've ceased forward motion, in fact, you've actually reversed.
View Full Version : Is this legal?
Pages :
[1]
2
Bikepacker67
09-28-07, 07:17 PM
As you complete your 360, you are re-approaching the stop sign, and legally have to stop.
kuan
09-28-07, 07:33 PM
Crap there goes my theory.
Damn having children. Friday night and sitting at home.
Damn having children. Friday night and sitting at home.
Helmet Head
09-28-07, 08:57 PM
As you complete your 360, you are re-approaching the stop sign, and legally have to stop.
You'd also be moving the wrong direction for that side of the road for at least half of the 360.
You'd also be moving the wrong direction for that side of the road for at least half of the 360.
Blue Order
09-28-07, 09:00 PM
There's a case from 1897 in which a cyclist did just that, and then got hit by a train when he crossed. The court ruled that the cyclist did not stop by riding in a circle, and his widow lost her case.
ivegotabike
09-28-07, 09:58 PM
ummm track stand?
StephenH
09-28-07, 10:34 PM
Reminds me of an incident long ago. We go out to the beach with my uncle. He stops at a four-way stop, drives through, and discovers the road is blocked immediately beyond by washed-up sand. So he throws it in reverse, and asks the immortal question, "Do you have to stop when you back through a stop sign?"
Helmet Head
09-28-07, 10:46 PM
And that reminds of an old Cheech and Chong sketch.
(paraphased from memory from like 30+ years ago)
Chong: Oh man, you just ran that stop sign.
Cheech: Sh!t. Oh well, I'll stop twice at the next one.
(paraphased from memory from like 30+ years ago)
Chong: Oh man, you just ran that stop sign.
Cheech: Sh!t. Oh well, I'll stop twice at the next one.
LittleBigMan
09-28-07, 10:51 PM
I don't know, my wife doesn't even bother the 360 in the car. :p
StrangeWill
09-29-07, 02:05 AM
I'm questioning why there is a 360 maneuver in the first place...
kuan
09-29-07, 03:00 AM
Because sometimes you know the trackstand just.. isn't... going... toworkout.
RecumbentTriker
09-29-07, 03:25 AM
I'm questioning why there is a 360 maneuver in the first place...
Sounds like a double U-turn *grin*
Sounds like a double U-turn *grin*
Hobartlemagne
09-29-07, 05:22 AM
In many areas, the legal definition of a bike stopping includes putting a foot on the ground
while not in motion.
while not in motion.
noisebeam
09-29-07, 11:21 AM
In many areas, the legal definition of a bike stopping includes putting a foot on the ground
while not in motion.
I've have yet to see any documentation that says this is true for any state or other locality in the US.
Al
while not in motion.
I've have yet to see any documentation that says this is true for any state or other locality in the US.
Al
Rex G
09-29-07, 12:10 PM
I've have yet to see any documentation that says this is true for any state or other locality in the US.
Al
It may or may not exist in statutes, but some areas seem to enforce it that way. Keep in mind that there are statutes, and then there are court decisions, called case law, that have a bearing on how laws are interpreted. Then, local governments will have on-staff attorneys who review laws, and develop policy based on case law, or their own personal interpretation, in the absence of case law, to guide the enforcement division of that political entity. In the absence of all of that, there is the individual officer's interpretation, which may or may not be supported by the local judge. An appeals court can reverse a local judge. An appeals court decision can become case law, if other judges use it to guide their decisions. And, so goes the circle of life....
Al
It may or may not exist in statutes, but some areas seem to enforce it that way. Keep in mind that there are statutes, and then there are court decisions, called case law, that have a bearing on how laws are interpreted. Then, local governments will have on-staff attorneys who review laws, and develop policy based on case law, or their own personal interpretation, in the absence of case law, to guide the enforcement division of that political entity. In the absence of all of that, there is the individual officer's interpretation, which may or may not be supported by the local judge. An appeals court can reverse a local judge. An appeals court decision can become case law, if other judges use it to guide their decisions. And, so goes the circle of life....
noisebeam
09-29-07, 01:06 PM
Like I said I've never seen any documentation including statutes, case law, AG opinions, anything. I have not even heard of a person who specifically was told they got the ticket because they didn't put a foot down. But I've heard over and over again people repeat that one needs to put a foot down for a legal stop, the majority of which seem to be repeating what they have heard from someone else.
Of course putting a foot down is a great communication tool, both to law enforcement and other drivers. That is why if I want to make it clear I am stopped to other drivers I always put a foot down. If no other drivers are visible from any direction I 'track stand' if the stop needs to only be momentary.
But back OT, I've never tried the 360 approach either. While it is not legal, it would also seem a waste of time and cause unneccessary confusion if other drivers are present.
Al
Of course putting a foot down is a great communication tool, both to law enforcement and other drivers. That is why if I want to make it clear I am stopped to other drivers I always put a foot down. If no other drivers are visible from any direction I 'track stand' if the stop needs to only be momentary.
But back OT, I've never tried the 360 approach either. While it is not legal, it would also seem a waste of time and cause unneccessary confusion if other drivers are present.
Al
Blue Order
09-29-07, 03:07 PM
Like I said I've never seen any documentation including statutes, case law, AG opinions, anything.I have yet to see anything that says "foot down" either.
EDIT: Of course, in the 1897 case I mentioned above, the court did say a cyclist is required to stop and dismount...
I have not even heard of a person who specifically was told they got the ticket because they didn't put a foot down. But I've heard over and over again people repeat that one needs to put a foot down for a legal stop, the majority of which seem to be repeating what they have heard from someone else.
Of course putting a foot down is a great communication tool, both to law enforcement and other drivers. That is why if I want to make it clear I am stopped to other drivers I always put a foot down.You're absolutely right about the value of "foot down."
EDIT: Of course, in the 1897 case I mentioned above, the court did say a cyclist is required to stop and dismount...
I have not even heard of a person who specifically was told they got the ticket because they didn't put a foot down. But I've heard over and over again people repeat that one needs to put a foot down for a legal stop, the majority of which seem to be repeating what they have heard from someone else.
Of course putting a foot down is a great communication tool, both to law enforcement and other drivers. That is why if I want to make it clear I am stopped to other drivers I always put a foot down.You're absolutely right about the value of "foot down."
shumacher
09-29-07, 03:19 PM
I've had some guy behind me in a pickup try to California stop a stop sign that I was still stopping for. I agree, trackstands don't always convey the message "I'm stopping", especially in locales where bicycle laws are disregarded. The 360 thing would probably baffle everyone involved.
OH306
09-29-07, 03:19 PM
Gee, to me STOP always meant STOP, not ride in a circle for a while.
LittleBigMan
09-29-07, 07:44 PM
Gee, to me STOP always meant STOP, not ride in a circle for a while.
For my wife, STOP means slowly roll into the intersection, then GO.
She doesn't ride a bike. :D
For my wife, STOP means slowly roll into the intersection, then GO.
She doesn't ride a bike. :D
gritface
09-29-07, 07:54 PM
Of course putting a foot down is a great communication tool, both to law enforcement and other drivers. That is why if I want to make it clear I am stopped to other drivers I always put a foot down.
So there you go kuan -- just ride through stop signs with your foot down. It will look like you've come to a complete stop to law enforcement.
Perhaps you could also ride against traffic where the stop sign doesn't 'reach'.
I am curious to determine why you would prefer a 360 over stopping. It would seem to me that a 360 would take more time to execute.
What exactly is the goal?
So there you go kuan -- just ride through stop signs with your foot down. It will look like you've come to a complete stop to law enforcement.
Perhaps you could also ride against traffic where the stop sign doesn't 'reach'.
I am curious to determine why you would prefer a 360 over stopping. It would seem to me that a 360 would take more time to execute.
What exactly is the goal?
LittleBigMan
09-29-07, 08:09 PM
I am curious to determine why you would prefer a 360 over stopping. It would seem to me that a 360 would take more time to execute.
What exactly is the goal?
Sounds like a motorist:
"I am curious why you would prefer to ride a bicycle instead of drive a car. It would seem to me that riding a bicycle would take more time to execute."
:)
What exactly is the goal?
Sounds like a motorist:
"I am curious why you would prefer to ride a bicycle instead of drive a car. It would seem to me that riding a bicycle would take more time to execute."
:)
gritface
09-29-07, 08:33 PM
Sounds like a motorist:
"I am curious why you would prefer to ride a bicycle instead of drive a car. It would seem to me that riding a bicycle would take more time to execute."
:)
Oh, me personally? I stop at stop signs. Just trying to understand why some cyclists don't like to stop.
I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that mentioned some older-aged cyclists are using road bikes as status symbols.. well here's a quote from the article:
Mr. Guler says almost all of his customers are male and over 40 years old; they see their bikes as status symbols, something they've worked hard to afford. He likens it to a midlife-crisis form of transportation, like a Porsche. The difference, says Greg Webber, Jamis Bicycle's vice president for product development, is that a high-end bicycle also shows continued vitality. He says, "It's pretty much the ultimate way to prove you're alive and kicking."
Back to my point - Being able to stop and accelerate on a bike repeatedly shows vitality and control!
"I am curious why you would prefer to ride a bicycle instead of drive a car. It would seem to me that riding a bicycle would take more time to execute."
:)
Oh, me personally? I stop at stop signs. Just trying to understand why some cyclists don't like to stop.
I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that mentioned some older-aged cyclists are using road bikes as status symbols.. well here's a quote from the article:
Mr. Guler says almost all of his customers are male and over 40 years old; they see their bikes as status symbols, something they've worked hard to afford. He likens it to a midlife-crisis form of transportation, like a Porsche. The difference, says Greg Webber, Jamis Bicycle's vice president for product development, is that a high-end bicycle also shows continued vitality. He says, "It's pretty much the ultimate way to prove you're alive and kicking."
Back to my point - Being able to stop and accelerate on a bike repeatedly shows vitality and control!
seeker333
09-29-07, 08:36 PM
In many areas, the legal definition of a bike stopping includes putting a foot on the ground
while not in motion.
They should apply that rule to motor vehicles too.
while not in motion.
They should apply that rule to motor vehicles too.
Rex G
09-29-07, 08:51 PM
A cop stopped a bicyclist who did not completely stop for a stop sign. The cyclist was a lawyer, and argued that he had just slowed down enough to amount to the same thing as a stop, and asked the officer to define or demonstrate "stop." So, the officer takes his nightstick, and starts rapidly beating on the lawyer's head. The officer then asks, "Do you want me to just slow down, or do you want me to stop?" :) Sorry, old joke, recycled.
LittleBigMan
09-29-07, 08:54 PM
Oh, me personally? I stop at stop signs. Just trying to understand why some cyclists don't like to stop.
I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that mentioned some older-aged cyclists are using road bikes as status symbols.. well here's a quote from the article:
Mr. Guler says almost all of his customers are male and over 40 years old; they see their bikes as status symbols...a high-end bicycle also shows continued vitality. He says, "It's pretty much the ultimate way to prove you're alive and kicking."
Back to my point - Being able to stop and accelerate on a bike repeatedly shows vitality and control!
Ok. So over 40 is "old?"
http://www.daytoncyclingclub.org/Photos/2002/2002%20Duck%20Bday%20Ride1.jpg
He was still riding at 103.
I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that mentioned some older-aged cyclists are using road bikes as status symbols.. well here's a quote from the article:
Mr. Guler says almost all of his customers are male and over 40 years old; they see their bikes as status symbols...a high-end bicycle also shows continued vitality. He says, "It's pretty much the ultimate way to prove you're alive and kicking."
Back to my point - Being able to stop and accelerate on a bike repeatedly shows vitality and control!
Ok. So over 40 is "old?"
http://www.daytoncyclingclub.org/Photos/2002/2002%20Duck%20Bday%20Ride1.jpg
He was still riding at 103.
gritface
09-29-07, 09:30 PM
Ok. So over 40 is "old?"
http://www.daytoncyclingclub.org/Photos/2002/2002%20Duck%20Bday%20Ride1.jpg
He was still riding at 103.
But did he stop at stop signs or do 360's?
http://www.daytoncyclingclub.org/Photos/2002/2002%20Duck%20Bday%20Ride1.jpg
He was still riding at 103.
But did he stop at stop signs or do 360's?
LittleBigMan
09-30-07, 03:03 PM
But did he stop at stop signs or do 360's?
lol
Why don't you e-mail him and ask if he even cares?
lol
Why don't you e-mail him and ask if he even cares?
Carusoswi
10-01-07, 04:52 AM
There's a case from 1897 in which a cyclist did just that, and then got hit by a train when he crossed. The court ruled that the cyclist did not stop by riding in a circle, and his widow lost her case.
Interesting that this case apparently revolved around whether he stopped or not. Even if he stopped and waited half an hour at the crossing, if he chose to pull into the path of a train, the accident would have been his fault. Trains have the right of way in most of the areas with which I am familiar, do they not?
Caruso
Interesting that this case apparently revolved around whether he stopped or not. Even if he stopped and waited half an hour at the crossing, if he chose to pull into the path of a train, the accident would have been his fault. Trains have the right of way in most of the areas with which I am familiar, do they not?
Caruso
Carusoswi
10-01-07, 05:15 AM
There is an intersection that I use that is a "T". I approach that intersection from the "bottom" of the "T" so that I have to turn left or right. I make a left at this intersection. My street (bottom of the "T") is a wide two-laner with generally little or no traffic. Cross traffic moves at a brisk 45 or 50 mph across the top of the "T". Depending upon what I observe as an opening in traffic, I will track stand, or stop and put a foot down. At other times, if checking in my mirror, I see that there is no traffic in my lane, I'll just do slow circles and re-evaluate my chances of entering the intersection each time I approach it.
If I've stood still or circled for a while, I might even grab a left-lane (lane with traffic approaching from my left) only opening in the traffic, make a right turn, and right the center line away from my intended direction of travel until an opening occurs in the far lane, at which point, I make a u-turn and proceed.
If I approach that intersection and both cross lanes are clear, I run the stop.
Now, you can go on and on about what is legal. I contend that, at all the times I deal with this intersection, I'm doing what is safe . . . for me and for others.
I've pulled pretty much all of these maneuvers in front of police officers (it's a favorite location for speed traps), and none has ever made an issue of how I choose to negotiate this corner. I must point out that the view at this intersection is wide open. You get a good advance view of traffic moving from both directions as you approach. When I run that stop, I'm not blowing it. I've observed the traffic conditions continuously as I approach from probably a good 1/4-mile back.
By the book, if U-turns aren't illegal in your neck of the woods (they aren't in mine unless specific postings prohibit them locally), then, there is nothing explicitly wrong with riding in circles on the road. When you approach that stop sign with intent to proceed through, however, again, by the book, you should come to a complete stop before proceeding. I'm not going into whether you need to put a foot down, though. That's beyond picayune IMO.
Again, IMO, if you are exercising due caution, you can probably justify just about any maneuver you can think of that can be made on a bike. Conversely, if a police officer wants to go strictly by the book, they could cite you for any that don't follow the letter of the law. Fortunately, in my experience, most police officers are dedicated to promoting the safe progression of all types of traffic, and most will not stop you unless what you are doing represents a danger to yourself or others. YMMV.
Caruso
If I've stood still or circled for a while, I might even grab a left-lane (lane with traffic approaching from my left) only opening in the traffic, make a right turn, and right the center line away from my intended direction of travel until an opening occurs in the far lane, at which point, I make a u-turn and proceed.
If I approach that intersection and both cross lanes are clear, I run the stop.
Now, you can go on and on about what is legal. I contend that, at all the times I deal with this intersection, I'm doing what is safe . . . for me and for others.
I've pulled pretty much all of these maneuvers in front of police officers (it's a favorite location for speed traps), and none has ever made an issue of how I choose to negotiate this corner. I must point out that the view at this intersection is wide open. You get a good advance view of traffic moving from both directions as you approach. When I run that stop, I'm not blowing it. I've observed the traffic conditions continuously as I approach from probably a good 1/4-mile back.
By the book, if U-turns aren't illegal in your neck of the woods (they aren't in mine unless specific postings prohibit them locally), then, there is nothing explicitly wrong with riding in circles on the road. When you approach that stop sign with intent to proceed through, however, again, by the book, you should come to a complete stop before proceeding. I'm not going into whether you need to put a foot down, though. That's beyond picayune IMO.
Again, IMO, if you are exercising due caution, you can probably justify just about any maneuver you can think of that can be made on a bike. Conversely, if a police officer wants to go strictly by the book, they could cite you for any that don't follow the letter of the law. Fortunately, in my experience, most police officers are dedicated to promoting the safe progression of all types of traffic, and most will not stop you unless what you are doing represents a danger to yourself or others. YMMV.
Caruso
Hobartlemagne
10-01-07, 05:41 AM
I've have yet to see any documentation that says this is true for any state or other locality in the US.
Al
Well, It may not be documentation but the president of the bike club I belong to
makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
Al
Well, It may not be documentation but the president of the bike club I belong to
makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
gcl8a
10-01-07, 05:45 AM
Get to a stop sign, do a 360, and then go through. You've ceased forward motion, in fact, you've actually reversed.
Depends on if you're heading with or against the rotation of the earth...:D
Depends on if you're heading with or against the rotation of the earth...:D
cc_rider
10-01-07, 06:06 AM
Well, It may not be documentation but the president of the bike club I belong to
makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
I've never agreed that thinking.
I've always considered the foot-on-ground stop to be the equivalent of a driver having to put the car transmission into park when they pull up to the stop sign, while the track stand is more like braking and stopping while still in gear.
makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
I've never agreed that thinking.
I've always considered the foot-on-ground stop to be the equivalent of a driver having to put the car transmission into park when they pull up to the stop sign, while the track stand is more like braking and stopping while still in gear.
edzo
10-01-07, 06:20 AM
the 360 is the illegal part
the whole concept of traffic safety, is everyone follows the
law, so peoples actions are predictable.
your 360 is some type of clown act you invented
better at the circus
not acceptable at an intersection
the whole concept of traffic safety, is everyone follows the
law, so peoples actions are predictable.
your 360 is some type of clown act you invented
better at the circus
not acceptable at an intersection
OH306
10-01-07, 06:27 AM
There is an intersection that I use that is a "T". ...................unless what you are doing represents a danger to yourself or others. YMMV.
Caruso
Caruso, Injecting logic into this zoo is not standard operating procedure. You will anger the animals.:D
Caruso
Caruso, Injecting logic into this zoo is not standard operating procedure. You will anger the animals.:D
noisebeam
10-01-07, 08:38 AM
Well, It may not be documentation but the president of the bike club I belong to makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
Or perhaps that's just a handy way of saying 'a full no wheel moving stop.' Most non-cyclists think the only way to achieve this is to put a foot down.
Al
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
Or perhaps that's just a handy way of saying 'a full no wheel moving stop.' Most non-cyclists think the only way to achieve this is to put a foot down.
Al
kuan
10-01-07, 08:43 AM
I'm sure it's demonstrable.
Carusoswi
10-01-07, 01:10 PM
the 360 is the illegal part
Ok, so, what's illegal about a bike making a 360? I doubt you'll see any code anywhere on that, nor will you find many cops who would give you a problem with it if you weren't doing it in traffic on some busy street. There are no cars around when I make my circles. Of all the elements making up this discussion, the 360 is probably the most innocuous of them all. The central issue, in my view, is how to handle the stop sign - do you stop completely or not.
In the example I gave, there are definitely times when stopping exposes me and other traffic to more danger than if I didn't stop. In that situation, I will not stop, period. If I get a ticket someday (and so far, cops have not ticketed me), I'll gladly pay the fine, take the points (if there are any), whatever. It's preferable to causing an accident and perhaps an injury to myself or others.
I will concede that, in most situations, the safest thing to do is to stop for stop signs. Most is not all. You still have to evaluate every situation on an individual basis. I think it pretty foolish for a cyclist approaching an intersection such as the one I described to stop when there is no other traffic, then, try to get going again when the time spent stopping exposes the cyclist to fast moving traffic unnecessarily.
Oh, and before someone tells me they would avoid such situations by taking an alternate route, this intersection is the only route to the apartment where I spend my time during the week. For me, there is no avoiding it.
Caruso
Ok, so, what's illegal about a bike making a 360? I doubt you'll see any code anywhere on that, nor will you find many cops who would give you a problem with it if you weren't doing it in traffic on some busy street. There are no cars around when I make my circles. Of all the elements making up this discussion, the 360 is probably the most innocuous of them all. The central issue, in my view, is how to handle the stop sign - do you stop completely or not.
In the example I gave, there are definitely times when stopping exposes me and other traffic to more danger than if I didn't stop. In that situation, I will not stop, period. If I get a ticket someday (and so far, cops have not ticketed me), I'll gladly pay the fine, take the points (if there are any), whatever. It's preferable to causing an accident and perhaps an injury to myself or others.
I will concede that, in most situations, the safest thing to do is to stop for stop signs. Most is not all. You still have to evaluate every situation on an individual basis. I think it pretty foolish for a cyclist approaching an intersection such as the one I described to stop when there is no other traffic, then, try to get going again when the time spent stopping exposes the cyclist to fast moving traffic unnecessarily.
Oh, and before someone tells me they would avoid such situations by taking an alternate route, this intersection is the only route to the apartment where I spend my time during the week. For me, there is no avoiding it.
Caruso
willawry'd
10-01-07, 06:35 PM
I think it pretty foolish for a cyclist approaching an intersection such as the one I described to stop when there is no other traffic, then, try to get going again when the time spent stopping exposes the cyclist to fast moving traffic unnecessarily.first, how is the cyclist being exposed to fast moving traffic when there is no other traffic?
second, the "try to get going again" has to be the lamest excuse that is usually echoed by my roady friends. god forbid you get a little exercise on your ride.
now i'll agree that we over-saturate the roads with stop signs/lights, when a yield sign would sometimes suffice, but i'll never make a habit of blowing them nor will i feel "foolish" for stopping. Besides, i wouldn't want some kid to see me successfully blow through a stop sign and get the wrong impression.
second, the "try to get going again" has to be the lamest excuse that is usually echoed by my roady friends. god forbid you get a little exercise on your ride.
now i'll agree that we over-saturate the roads with stop signs/lights, when a yield sign would sometimes suffice, but i'll never make a habit of blowing them nor will i feel "foolish" for stopping. Besides, i wouldn't want some kid to see me successfully blow through a stop sign and get the wrong impression.
cadillacmike68
10-01-07, 07:22 PM
And that reminds of an old Cheech and Chong sketch.
(paraphased from memory from like 30+ years ago)
Chong: Oh man, you just ran that stop sign.
Cheech: Sh!t. Oh well, I'll stop twice at the next one.
I used to have that album - yes album. It was a red light not a stop sign but that's close enough :D
(paraphased from memory from like 30+ years ago)
Chong: Oh man, you just ran that stop sign.
Cheech: Sh!t. Oh well, I'll stop twice at the next one.
I used to have that album - yes album. It was a red light not a stop sign but that's close enough :D
cadillacmike68
10-01-07, 07:29 PM
They should apply that rule to motor vehicles too.
Only if you drive a fred flinstone car!
Only if you drive a fred flinstone car!
merlinextraligh
10-02-07, 07:20 AM
In many areas, the legal definition of a bike stopping includes putting a foot on the ground
while not in motion.
I've never seen any definition that includes putting a foot down. I think it's more a matter of tha'st how some police officers interpret it; in part from the mistaken belief that it is impossible to stop a bike without putting a foot down.
while not in motion.
I've never seen any definition that includes putting a foot down. I think it's more a matter of tha'st how some police officers interpret it; in part from the mistaken belief that it is impossible to stop a bike without putting a foot down.
merlinextraligh
10-02-07, 07:35 AM
Ok, so, what's illegal about a bike making a 360?
Caruso
I can think of a few problems:
1) you're not riding as far right as practical, ( a requirement in most vehicle codes)
2) at some point in the 360, you're riding in the wrong direction in the wrong lane of travel,
3) as pointed out above, you're not stopping as you approach the stop sign the second time,
4) the definition of "stop" includes cessation of movement, not just foward progress.
I'm sure with some more time, and a perusal of the code, I could come up with a few others.
Caruso
I can think of a few problems:
1) you're not riding as far right as practical, ( a requirement in most vehicle codes)
2) at some point in the 360, you're riding in the wrong direction in the wrong lane of travel,
3) as pointed out above, you're not stopping as you approach the stop sign the second time,
4) the definition of "stop" includes cessation of movement, not just foward progress.
I'm sure with some more time, and a perusal of the code, I could come up with a few others.
recursive
10-02-07, 08:49 AM
Well, It may not be documentation but the president of the bike club I belong to
makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
Getting a ticket without a law to back it up should be relatively easy to defeat. If anyone told me that, I'd be trackstanding all over the place.
makes a point to be in touch with the police chiefs in ours and the neighboring
cities we ride in, and he has told us that the chiefs say the foot on the ground
stop is what's expected of us in our area if we want to avoid being ticketed.
Getting a ticket without a law to back it up should be relatively easy to defeat. If anyone told me that, I'd be trackstanding all over the place.
Hobartlemagne
10-02-07, 10:21 AM
Getting a ticket without a law to back it up should be relatively easy to defeat. If anyone told me that, I'd be trackstanding all over the place.
That costs money, and I'm cheap and busy
That costs money, and I'm cheap and busy
LittleBigMan
10-02-07, 07:09 PM
the 360 is the illegal part
I guess you've never been in a neighborhood where kids ride bikes.
"Officer, arrest those children! They're riding in circles, and laughing!!"
(...and they're not wearing helmets...or cycling-specific clothes!)
:eek:
I guess you've never been in a neighborhood where kids ride bikes.
"Officer, arrest those children! They're riding in circles, and laughing!!"
(...and they're not wearing helmets...or cycling-specific clothes!)
:eek:
Booger1
10-04-07, 02:32 AM
Must be a reason it's called a "track stand".If there any cars on the next track you go to,I would advise to putting your foot down then too!
I think getting hit by a train,riding in circles or not,is called Natural Selection...
I think getting hit by a train,riding in circles or not,is called Natural Selection...
simonite
10-04-07, 06:34 AM
Oh, me personally? I stop at stop signs. Just trying to understand why some cyclists don't like to stop.
I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that mentioned some older-aged cyclists are using road bikes as status symbols.. well here's a quote from the article:
Back to my point - Being able to stop and accelerate on a bike repeatedly shows vitality and control!
Oh my, now I'm depressed. I thought I was cycling to increase my fitness, lower my wieght, and control my cholesteral, and for fun. Now I find out I'm actually having a mid-life crisis!!!!
I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that mentioned some older-aged cyclists are using road bikes as status symbols.. well here's a quote from the article:
Back to my point - Being able to stop and accelerate on a bike repeatedly shows vitality and control!
Oh my, now I'm depressed. I thought I was cycling to increase my fitness, lower my wieght, and control my cholesteral, and for fun. Now I find out I'm actually having a mid-life crisis!!!!
edzo
10-04-07, 06:57 AM
Ok, so, what's illegal about a bike making a 360? I doubt you'll see any code anywhere on that, nor will you find many cops who would give you a problem with it if you weren't doing it in traffic on some busy street. There are no cars around when I make my circles. Of all the elements making up this discussion, the 360 is probably the most innocuous of them all. The central issue, in my view, is how to handle the stop sign - do you stop completely or not.
In the example I gave, there are definitely times when stopping exposes me and other traffic to more danger than if I didn't stop. In that situation, I will not stop, period. If I get a ticket someday (and so far, cops have not ticketed me), I'll gladly pay the fine, take the points (if there are any), whatever. It's preferable to causing an accident and perhaps an injury to myself or others.
I will concede that, in most situations, the safest thing to do is to stop for stop signs. Most is not all. You still have to evaluate every situation on an individual basis. I think it pretty foolish for a cyclist approaching an intersection such as the one I described to stop when there is no other traffic, then, try to get going again when the time spent stopping exposes the cyclist to fast moving traffic unnecessarily.
Oh, and before someone tells me they would avoid such situations by taking an alternate route, this intersection is the only route to the apartment where I spend my time during the week. For me, there is no avoiding it.
Caruso
STOP means stop. there is no other interpretation of the law. just stop. easy. simple. it's the law.
if you want to do 360's in the road or run stop signs that is your business.
everyone needs to stop. if you don't then who really cares, but you are breaking the law if you don't stop.
how simple is that ?
In the example I gave, there are definitely times when stopping exposes me and other traffic to more danger than if I didn't stop. In that situation, I will not stop, period. If I get a ticket someday (and so far, cops have not ticketed me), I'll gladly pay the fine, take the points (if there are any), whatever. It's preferable to causing an accident and perhaps an injury to myself or others.
I will concede that, in most situations, the safest thing to do is to stop for stop signs. Most is not all. You still have to evaluate every situation on an individual basis. I think it pretty foolish for a cyclist approaching an intersection such as the one I described to stop when there is no other traffic, then, try to get going again when the time spent stopping exposes the cyclist to fast moving traffic unnecessarily.
Oh, and before someone tells me they would avoid such situations by taking an alternate route, this intersection is the only route to the apartment where I spend my time during the week. For me, there is no avoiding it.
Caruso
STOP means stop. there is no other interpretation of the law. just stop. easy. simple. it's the law.
if you want to do 360's in the road or run stop signs that is your business.
everyone needs to stop. if you don't then who really cares, but you are breaking the law if you don't stop.
how simple is that ?
noisebeam
10-04-07, 08:40 AM
Must be a reason it's called a "track stand".
Thats my line :)
"It's called a track stand, not a street stand"
Al
Thats my line :)
"It's called a track stand, not a street stand"
Al
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.