Advocacy & Safety - CBS's David Feherty's article on being hit by a truck

Link below is to an article about David Feherty, CBS Golf Analyst and his story of being hit by a truck this past spring in Dallas. Great article. Must read:

http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=MultiPublishing&mod=PublishingTitles&mid=7155F7796F354F21B1183937D847D6DF&AudId=29CB3DCAC7E94A08B642EC371FE6E70B&tier=4&id=8BD4D1BB66854616A6E422EAA77813CF

good read, thanks for posting

Now that was awsome.

"There are compression issues. Normally it’s bigger than that! Great, I’m dying and spending my last minutes as George Costanza."

Thanks.

Great article. My favorite part (besides the George Costanza reference) is:

"This problem is caused by careless and inattentive drivers, period."

I wonder if a rear view mirror might have saved him some agony though.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked that 'He was in the road' turned out to be a successful defence.

that was a great article. I like the fact that he repeated "truck driver that had to beat me to a red light" over and over. That's the one time I feel super-comfortable taking the lane.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked that 'He was in the road' turned out to be a successful defence.


In Dallas, the police will not issue tickets unless they actually see the accident take place. Running over a cyclist in Dallas has no criminal penalty.

In Dallas, the police will not issue tickets unless they actually see the accident take place.

LOL.

wait...

Are you serious?

He was wearing two red blinkies, one on his helmet and one on his jersey. I've seen this before, actually I haven't "seen" this until I could physically see the lights themselves as I passed the cyclist. I initially thought they had no rear lights. The lights were aimed anywhere but back where a driver would notice them. Get those lights OFF the jersey/helmet/backpack/seatbag and get them on something solid, like a seat post or rear rack.

What was that truck driver thinking!?!?!

In Dallas, the police will not issue tickets unless they actually see the accident take place. Running over a cyclist in Dallas has no criminal penalty.

In Florida simply crashing your car doesn't seem to be a ticket-able offense. I've been involved in two incidences where neither driver was cited for the crash.

Scenario 1

Young drunk/drugged up lady crashed her car into our neighbor's tree late at night. I come out to help. She flees, walks into my house unbeknownst to her and me, steals random items (an 8x10 of me, my cordless phone, my roommate's t-shirt and his pack of ciggs), and returns to the scene. Cops are going to let her go until we notice a cell phone laying on the floor and my roommate notices she had a different shirt on. It's her phone. She is booked for robbery. No traffic related offenses cited.

Scenario 2

Young man crashes his car into my parked car outside my friend's house while drag racing in a neighborhood around 1 am. I come out to see wtf just happened and find my car 30 ft from where I parked it. After coming to, driver and passenger run. Cops show up and catch em with dogs who follow the trail of blood. Driver ticketed for hit and run. Cop said no ticket would have been given had they remained at the scene.

So there ya go. Two anecdotes of how simply wrecking your car under your own control is not a ticketable offense. Seems crazy. No breathalyzers administered in either case. I recall in the first scenario, the officer stating that a police officer has to witness the driver behind the wheel for a DUI to be given. Doesn't matter that I and other witnesses found these drivers unconscious behind the wheel.

one of my co-workers rolled his car when he inattentively dropped a wheel off the side of the road and went into an over-sized ditch. Passers-by helped him get the car out of the ditch, and he drove it home and parked it in the garage. No injuries, no damage except to his car. A week later, cops showed up at work and gave him a ticket.

LOL.

wait...

Are you serious?

I second the question.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked that 'He was in the road' turned out to be a successful defence.

Oh which defense do you prefer: "he swerved" or "that's the way I always drive."

Both have been used to "relieve" drivers of the responsibility to avoid KILLING cyclists.

Scenario 1

Young drunk/drugged up lady crashed her car into our neighbor's tree late at night. I come out to help. She flees, walks into my house unbeknownst to her and me, steals random items (an 8x10 of me, my cordless phone, my roommate's t-shirt and his pack of ciggs), and returns to the scene. Cops are going to let her go until we notice a cell phone laying on the floor and my roommate notices she had a different shirt on. It's her phone. She is booked for robbery. No traffic related offenses cited.



This is all serious business, but I'm sorry I find this mental image hilarious. Woman crashes car near your house, decides best course of action is to rob you of some random items including an 8 x 10 picture of yourself:roflmao2:

"(If you’re driving while reading this, pull over, read that last bit again, roll this magazine up tight, and check your prostate with it. And stop whining. At least it’s a glossy.)"

LOL.

wait...

Are you serious?


Yes. I'm serious. The Dallas Police Department does not issue traffic tickets for car accidents, moving violations that is. They would still issue tickets for faulty equipment, no insurance, inspection sticker out of date, but I have never heard of them issuing a ticket for a moving violation that they did not witness. This is their standard policy. They do write up accident reports which will squarely place blame on the at fault party. But that's as far as it goes.

They also do not respond to burglar alarms, they will not even respond to commercial burglar alarms at businesses. Just the way it is. In Dallas, you must take the law into your own hands. No one will come to help you.

Yes. I'm serious. The Dallas Police Department does not issue traffic tickets for car accidents, moving violations that is. They would still issue tickets for faulty equipment, no insurance, inspection sticker out of date, but I have never heard of them issuing a ticket for a moving violation that they did not witness. This is their standard policy. They do write up accident reports which will squarely place blame on the at fault party. But that's as far as it goes.

They also do not respond to burglar alarms, they will not even respond to commercial burglar alarms at businesses. Just the way it is. In Dallas, you must take the law into your own hands. No one will come to help you.

I'd move.

Yes. I'm serious. The Dallas Police Department does not issue traffic tickets for car accidents, moving violations that is. They would still issue tickets for faulty equipment, no insurance, inspection sticker out of date, but I have never heard of them issuing a ticket for a moving violation that they did not witness. This is their standard policy. They do write up accident reports which will squarely place blame on the at fault party. But that's as far as it goes.

They also do not respond to burglar alarms, they will not even respond to commercial burglar alarms at businesses. Just the way it is. In Dallas, you must take the law into your own hands. No one will come to help you.

What if the guy admitted to the offense?

I searched on the internet to see if Feherty collected personal injury damages. Does anyone know?

Yes. I'm serious. The Dallas Police Department does not issue traffic tickets for car accidents, moving violations that is. They would still issue tickets for faulty equipment, no insurance, inspection sticker out of date, but I have never heard of them issuing a ticket for a moving violation that they did not witness. This is their standard policy. They do write up accident reports which will squarely place blame on the at fault party. But that's as far as it goes.

They also do not respond to burglar alarms, they will not even respond to commercial burglar alarms at businesses. Just the way it is. In Dallas, you must take the law into your own hands. No one will come to help you.Wow. What's the point of having the police force then?

--J

Wow. What's the point of having the police force then?

--J

Well without the uniforms, how would you know who to bribe? ;)

At this point, I don’t know if I’m going to live, but I do know that if I die, I definitely want to take this guy with me. If I could just get up, maybe I could push him into oncoming traffic. That way, even if the ******* survived, he’d know what it feels like to be hit by several tons of fast-moving metal. (For the record, it hurts.)

:lol: That's a good line. It sucks that this happened to him. It sounds like a bad deal. The worst part is the last paragraph where it says he got hit again . . . :(

I am way more pro-car than anybody on here, but for the life of me I can't understand why the driver got off. Sounds to me that this assclown has no business driving, let alone pulling a trailer. :mad:

:lol: That's a good line. It sucks that this happened to him. It sounds like a bad deal. The worst part is the last paragraph where it says he got hit again . . . :(

I am way more pro-car than anybody on here, but for the life of me I can't understand why the driver got off. Sounds to me that this assclown has no business driving, let alone pulling a trailer. :mad:

It's not just this clown... there are plenty of other situations where motorists were not even ticketed after hitting a cyclist where they would have otherwise been ticketed for hitting a car in similar circumstances...

It's not just this clown... there are plenty of other situations where motorists were not even ticketed after hitting a cyclist where they would have otherwise been ticketed for hitting a car in similar circumstances...

Right, I don't understand why ANYONE gets off. ( :lol: I mean, out of a ticket)

Wow. What's the point of having the police force then?

--J

Yeah. The 'it's only illegal if you get caught' line is mildly funny from a friend. When it's official policy... :wtf:

What was that truck driver thinking!?!?!

He wasn't. That's the problem.

Maybe people will start to think when our courts start holding them accountable.

Great article!

Boy, this is going to sound extremely insensitive.

1. We're only getting one side of the story. I see at least as many bonehead moves by cyclists as by motorists. And this is Feherty -- known for stretching a tale as far as he needs to to make a sale. Dallas P.D. are known for being pretty law-and-order. There's got to be some circumstance we're not hearing about. (And it may just be riding in low-light conditions on Park Lane. The cop may have seen this as contributing at least 50% to the accident -- and he would probably be right.)

2. He was on PARK LANE!? This has to be one of the least bicycle-friendly roads in North America. High traffic. High speed. Not much room for anyone. No shoulder or bike lane on most of it. Sorry, but I'll call riding Park Lane, in low-light conditions an I.Q. test. Dumb. Really dumb. (I hope he has found a smarter route to ride in Dallas. There are hundreds of them.)

3. The blinky thing. Clipped to his jersey? Attached to his helmet??? I wonder what direction they were pointed at the time. At any rate, in that situation, they were worthless. Even mounted to a seatpost, they just aren't that good. My boss recently passed me when I was on an early morning ride. He LIKES cyclists and it was an area, unlike Park Lane, with no distractions. But he said he never saw my flashing 10-LED tail light until he was right on me. My tail light huge and it is the brightest I have found. I had it aimed properly for a motorist to be flashed in the eyes about 150 feet back. Didn't work. (Fortunately, I was on the shoulder.)

Gotta ride smart. And that means there are some roads and circumstances you just don't ride in.

2. He was on PARK LANE!? This has to be one of the least bicycle-friendly roads in North America. High traffic. High speed. Not much room for anyone. No shoulder or bike lane on most of it. Sorry, but I'll call riding Park Lane, in low-light conditions an I.Q. test. Dumb. Really dumb. (I hope he has found a smarter route to ride in Dallas. There are hundreds of them.)

With proper lighting, cycling at night is just as safe as during the day. Plenty of cyclists on these forums commute on busy arterials without bike lanes/shoulders every day and manage to get along just fine. To label them dumb simply because they are doing something you wouldn't do is quite childish.


3. The blinky thing. Clipped to his jersey? Attached to his helmet??? I wonder what direction they were pointed at the time. At any rate, in that situation, they were worthless. Even mounted to a seatpost, they just aren't that good. My boss recently passed me when I was on an early morning ride. He LIKES cyclists and it was an area, unlike Park Lane, with no distractions. But he said he never saw my flashing 10-LED tail light until he was right on me. My tail light huge and it is the brightest I have found. I had it aimed properly for a motorist to be flashed in the eyes about 150 feet back. Didn't work. (Fortunately, I was on the shoulder.)

Gotta ride smart. And that means there are some roads and circumstances you just don't ride in.

I have to agree about improperly pointed blinkies as being next to worthless and clipping to a jersey/helmet is certainly not a reliable mounting location. However, your boss missing you on the road has a lot more to do with you being on the shoulder, using a portion of the pavement that he generally has no reason to pay attention to, than it does with your blinky not getting his attention. If you want some evidence that people pay little attention to what's in the shoulder/bike lane, do a search in the vehicular cycling forum for the "bike lane deaths" thread. Being out of the way doesn't mean your in any way better off than a cyclist in the way.

IF the police would issue a ticket without having witnessed the accident, I would think that "unsafe passing" would be obvious.

I hope that Feherty at least got an accident report pinning the blame on the motorist, for purposes of insurance, medical payments, and relative peace of mind.

With proper lighting, cycling at night is just as safe as during the day. Plenty of cyclists on these forums commute on busy arterials without bike lanes/shoulders every day and manage to get along just fine. To label them dumb simply because they are doing something you wouldn't do is quite childish.



I have to agree about improperly pointed blinkies as being next to worthless and clipping to a jersey/helmet is certainly not a reliable mounting location. However, your boss missing you on the road has a lot more to do with you being on the shoulder, using a portion of the pavement that he generally has no reason to pay attention to, than it does with your blinky not getting his attention. If you want some evidence that people pay little attention to what's in the shoulder/bike lane, do a search in the vehicular cycling forum for the "bike lane deaths" thread. Being out of the way doesn't mean your in any way better off than a cyclist in the way.

Have you ever driven on Park Lane in Dallas? I didn't think so. You go ride it (or, better yet, drive it) and you'll see that cycling there is extremely risky. Park Lane was poorly engineered from the outset and forty years of growth out from there has made it a dangerous road. There is too much high-dollar real estate built right up against the road, so they won't widen it or improve it. I don't know the stats, but I would guess Park Lane is one of the more dangerous roads in Dallas for vehicles of all types. To ride there in low-light conditions is foolhardy. I suspect there were a lot of Dallas commuters who read Feherty's article and thought, "DUHHHH!"

Cyclists have to show some sense of responsibility for ourselves. For those who know the road, I'm not sure Feherty's article does much for the cause of bicycle safety.

IF the police would issue a ticket without having witnessed the accident, I would think that "unsafe passing" would be obvious.

I hope that Feherty at least got an accident report pinning the blame on the motorist, for purposes of insurance, medical payments, and relative peace of mind.

Dallas police WILL issue a ticket without witnessing an accident -- if the offense is clear-cut. That's why I think there must be more to the story. We're only getting Feherty's (or Feherty's lawyer's) side.

Have you ever driven on Park Lane in Dallas? I didn't think so. You go ride it (or, better yet, drive it) and you'll see that cycling there is extremely risky. Park Lane was poorly engineered from the outset and forty years of growth out from there has made it a dangerous road. There is too much high-dollar real estate built right up against the road, so they won't widen it or improve it. I don't know the stats, but I would guess Park Lane is one of the more dangerous roads in Dallas for vehicles of all types. To ride there in low-light conditions is foolhardy. I suspect there were a lot of Dallas commuters who read Feherty's article and thought, "DUHHHH!"

Cyclists have to show some sense of responsibility for ourselves. For those who know the road, I'm not sure Feherty's article does much for the cause of bicycle safety.

What makes it so dangerous? Sounds like your biggest fear about cycling that road is the width. Does it happen to look anything like these roads:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=foulk+road,+wilmington,+de&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=28.334641,79.101563&ie=UTF8&ll=39.813283,-75.519161&spn=0.053535,0.154495&t=h&z=13&iwloc=addr
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=202,+fairfax,+de&sll=39.822513,-75.548515&sspn=0.107055,0.30899&ie=UTF8&ll=39.798645,-75.546455&spn=0.053546,0.154495&t=h&z=13&iwloc=addr

What makes it so dangerous?

if they ever actually rode on them, the VC's biggest strawmen would all be DOA

if they ever actually rode on them, the VC's biggest strawmen would all be DOA

Maybe it's because it's late, but you lost me.

you're lost alright. how about if you haven't ridden on it personally, don't comment on it

I have to agree about improperly pointed blinkies as being next to worthless and clipping to a jersey/helmet is certainly not a reliable mounting location. However, your boss missing you on the road has a lot more to do with you being on the shoulder, using a portion of the pavement that he generally has no reason to pay attention to, than it does with your blinky not getting his attention. If you want some evidence that people pay little attention to what's in the shoulder/bike lane, do a search in the vehicular cycling forum for the "bike lane deaths" thread. Being out of the way doesn't mean your in any way better off than a cyclist in the way.
I have to agree, several times i have come out to the road from a woodsy short cut to see co-workers driving by, I wave, they don't see me. They are zoned on the area in front of the windshield. people are UN-AWARE. It's the biggest hazard out there. The solution? No idea. Anyone?

you're lost alright. how about if you haven't ridden on it personally, don't comment on it

Doesn't sound like FlashBazbo has cycled on it either.

I also can't believe that you seem to be agreeing with the guy who seems to think Feherty is partially responsible for getting hit because he chose to ride his bike on a certain road.

The solution? No idea. Anyone?

Position yourself in a place where you'll be noticed and verify that you've been noticed. If you think you aren't being noticed and you need to be, do something to get their attention (stand up, weave a bit, turn around, etc.). If you are going to be out of the way, make sure you are far enough out of the way that you don't need to noticed by someone driving in the typical path. Verify that no one is leaving that path. Helps to have a mirror.

I also can't believe that you seem to be agreeing with the guy who seems to think Feherty is partially responsible for getting hit because he chose to ride his bike on a certain road.

did I say that? can you quote me? don't put words in my mouth, jackass.

:)

did I say that? can you quote me? don't put words in my mouth, jackass.

:)

"...you seem to be agreeing..."

I chose those words for a reason. Apparently you don't agree. Thanks for clueing me in. Why so much hostility?

Why so much hostility?

how long has this stupid VC vs. the other 95 % of cyclists debate gone on? I'm all for reasonable compromises, including taking the lane when appropriate, but enough is enough, cycling-specific infrastucture does work, when it's designed right; quit trying to deny it and maybe some of the hostility will go away.

Would VC have helped this guy? would a bike lane? would better road design in general? how about more motorist education? stop being so dogmatic and expand your viewpoint a bit.

Moral of the storie: if you ever want to murder someone, use your car.

In Georgia for example:

First degree homicide by vehicle
This is a felony, that upon conviction will result in a sentence of between 3 and 15 years of imprisonment (or between 5 and 20 years for habitual violators), with no parole for at least 1 year. A homicide is first degree homicide by vehicle if the driver "unlawfully met or overtook a school bus; unlawfully failed to stop after a collision; was driving recklessly; was driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs; failed to stop for, or otherwise was attempting to flee from a law enforcement officer; or had previously been declared a habitual violator".

One year before parole. HAHAHA. What a joke.

how long has this stupid VC vs. the other 95 % of cyclists debate gone on? I'm all for reasonable compromises, including taking the lane when appropriate, but enough is enough, cycling-specific infrastucture does work, when it's designed right; quit trying to deny it and maybe some of the hostility will go away.

Would VC have helped this guy? would a bike lane? would better road design in general? how about more motorist education? stop being so dogmatic and expand your viewpoint a bit.

All I've implied is that the road is probably safely bikeable without any changes. FlashBazbo hasn't given me any reasons to believe otherwise.

It sounds like there were a lot of factors that could have prevented this situation, but the details are far from crystal clear. As a cyclist in an advocacy forum, I wouldn't expect other cyclists to be dumping on the guy for his road choice. I feel that has very little to do with why he got hit. I also feel that motorist education, regardless of the amount, would have done NOTHING to change the outcome of this situation. A bike lane, maybe but no more than some extra pavement space would have helped. If Feherty didn't have a proper headlight (no headlight has been mentioned), he'd still be wide open to left hooks/crosses even if he did manage to aim his taillights properly regardless of the road configuration.

There really isn't much to learn from this story other than what can gleaned from our speculating about his blinkies not being visible and possibly his road position. There aren't many details to go on. But as a cyclist advocate, I don't like to see threads where the lesson learned is avoid this or that road. That shouldn't be a message we as cyclists should spread.

...There really isn't much to learn from this story other than what can gleaned from our speculating about his blinkies not being visible and possibly his road position...

Yeah, I don't know. I think he made his point clearly,


This problem is caused by careless and inattentive drivers, period...

I could give some kind of windbag lecture here on what cyclists need from motorists, but it’s really very simple: hang up and watch out. The state needs to pass a law with teeth, and—duh—the court system has to hold responsible for their actions those who control large, heavy, lethal machinery...

I entirely agree and would only add that there should be much more enforcement of better traffic behavior on the street.

That elected officials do not fund this because they will not get the support of the voting public who drive poorly and will be subject to prosecution, is the real crime.

I'm a bike commuter, roadie and tourer. From my experence, roadies are the least likley to "take the lane". I say this from my experence of riding with other roadies. I have been preaching to the group I ride with to "ride out into the lane" on the faster 2 lanes with no shoulders for years. Most of them are not getting the message and continue to hug the white line and talk about their "close calls" because people pass them with inches of room at high speeds. The also refuse to ride a mile strech "because it's too dangerous" of a road I take for 10 miles to work every day! I rode with a new rider once that refused to take the lane for an upcoming left turn because of a car coming up half a mile back. He knew this was the last time he would ride with us when I told him "he had better learn to ride like he belonged on the road"!
A few weeks ago one of our group, who is an insurance adjuster, had followed me for some distance noticed the cars did indeed give me more room when I was riding further into the lane. From personal experence I have found the advice to take the lane when needed is correct.
Now there are some roads I would perfer not to ride, I will admit that, but almost all can be ridden safe. Would the driver have driven directly over the cyclist and then exclamed " He was in the road"? I beleive most motorist don't want to run you down, but who knows?
In Tennessee there is a 3 feet law, I will bet my favorite jersey that not 1in 100 drivers have any idea it's on the books! Just like I will bet not 1 in 100 cyclist know there is a law in Tennessee that states slower vehicles are under obligation to pull aside and let traffic pass if there are more than 5 are behind you. Just for the record, one of the 3 foot laws name sake cyclist was killed here in Martin. The truck left his lane and struck him from behind. This was on a wide shouldered 4 lane road! Drivers are the ones responsible, THE END!

ThanX for the link. What a great read!!!!!! :) :thumb:

... Brad

Did I understand this correctly, he was finishing a 50 mile ride before the sun was up????

Boy, this is going to sound extremely insensitive.

1. We're only getting one side of the story. I see at least as many bonehead moves by cyclists as by motorists. And this is Feherty -- known for stretching a tale as far as he needs to to make a sale. Dallas P.D. are known for being pretty law-and-order. There's got to be some circumstance we're not hearing about. (And it may just be riding in low-light conditions on Park Lane. The cop may have seen this as contributing at least 50% to the accident -- and he would probably be right.)

2. He was on PARK LANE!? This has to be one of the least bicycle-friendly roads in North America. High traffic. High speed. Not much room for anyone. No shoulder or bike lane on most of it. Sorry, but I'll call riding Park Lane, in low-light conditions an I.Q. test. Dumb. Really dumb. (I hope he has found a smarter route to ride in Dallas. There are hundreds of them.)

3. The blinky thing. Clipped to his jersey? Attached to his helmet??? I wonder what direction they were pointed at the time. At any rate, in that situation, they were worthless. Even mounted to a seatpost, they just aren't that good. My boss recently passed me when I was on an early morning ride. He LIKES cyclists and it was an area, unlike Park Lane, with no distractions. But he said he never saw my flashing 10-LED tail light until he was right on me. My tail light huge and it is the brightest I have found. I had it aimed properly for a motorist to be flashed in the eyes about 150 feet back. Didn't work. (Fortunately, I was on the shoulder.)

Gotta ride smart. And that means there are some roads and circumstances you just don't ride in.


Do you work for the irrigation truck company?

1. The driver was found completely at fault, 100% by the Dallas Police Department. In addition, witnesses to the accident back this up. There was never ever any shred of doubt in the cyclist's side of events. It has been widely reported in TV media that the driver of the truck was 100% at fault. I don't know how you can even second guess this.

2. Do you even know what section of Park Lane he was on? I do. It's a brightly lit 4 lane road, posted speed limit of 30mph. Excellent pavement.

Here, take a look for yourself:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=8096+park+lane+dallas,+tx&sll=32.872437,-96.767133&sspn=0.001072,0.001717&layer=c&ie=UTF8&ll=32.876199,-96.766441&spn=0.008578,0.013733&t=h&z=16&cbll=32.871899,-96.767254&panoid=9bqssgvcyWkeq2H01Kugeg&cbp=1,27.639881910304723,,0,8.55453065057094

Who looks dumb now? Maybe you should rethink calling people "Dumb. Really Dumb" when posting here. Park Lane is a marked bike route by the City of Dallas. There is a "BIKE ROUTE" sign not 100 feet from where David was hit. It is by far the best spot to cross Central Expressway for about 2 miles. The next closest that time of day is Southwestern Blvd which is much further to the south.

3. Your blinkie arguement holds no merit.


I find your other posts on this subject flawed too. No one, not a single person even disagrees with David's story. The police, the witnesses all agree that it was the drivers fault. There is not any room for discussion about this. His story represents the facts. Period. I do not know where you can even think otherwise.

I do not understand how some posters here can turn such a great story of overcoming near death, into a series of posts pissing vinegar. Get a life.

Dallas police WILL issue a ticket without witnessing an accident -- if the offense is clear-cut. That's why I think there must be more to the story. We're only getting Feherty's (or Feherty's lawyer's) side.

No. No. No. Dallas Police will not issue a ticket. I spend about 40% of my time in Dallas, the rest in New Mexico. Dallas Police will not issue a ticket. I am certain of this. I have a friend who is a PI attorney in Dallas and he says that DPD will not issue tickets. I even called him before posting to make sure my info as correct.