Originally Posted by
crhilton
The best I can make of it is that the judge sees the traffic laws as coming from two places:
1.) Written traffic laws.
2.) Traffic culture in practice.
And he's right that while he was riding within #1, he was probably so far out of #2 that he caused monkeys driving high speed vehicles to risk their own necks. I don't think it's a completely ridiculous premise. It's sad though that a minority is, in some incredibly minor sense, punished because the majority is too stupid to handle them.
The judge was probably also thinking "what the heck is so bad about that shoulder?" He can't say that though.
Caveat: I have no side in this. I really could see both sides of this discussion (not Bek's, he's making this a partisan thing in my opinion). It seemed, from the bad pictures, like that highway had a pretty decent shoulder and I'd probably ride that. But I don't want to say I can tell better from some bad pictures than Reed could from actually being there. But when you add in that the cop said "hey, just ride on the shoulder" it adds in an element of not listening to the authority. It's not that the cop is writing permanent law in his command. No, he's saying "today ride on the shoulder."
Ah, but there is a problem with that logic. Today we have the cop instructing ChipSeal (or some other cyclist) to ride in the shoulder, because it's "too dangerous to ride in the lane, today." The following day or week the danger to ChipSeal (or some other cyclist) isn't as great as previously so they're once again taking the lane. The same cop sees ChipSeal (or some other cyclist) riding on the same road in the same manner and pulls them over and this time instead of issuing either a warning and/or instructing them to once again ride in the shoulder the cop either issues a citation or arrests them for failing to obeying a lawful order issued by a well meaning officer. I can see the conversation going something like this:
Cop: I told you yesterday/last week to ride in the shoulder.
ChipSeal/Cyclist: Officer that was yesterday/last week. Today there isn't as much traffic so why do I have to ride in the shoulder?
Cop: Because I instructed you to ride in the shoulder yesterday/last week. Your not riding in the shoulder therefore I have no choice but to issue you a citation, or I'm going to have to arrest you.
By ordering a person who is riding in a legal and safe manner to ride in the shoulder is setting a precedent, that could eventually become a new law.
Originally Posted by
crhilton
If the cop had made the opposite demand I'd probably tend to side with the guy on the bike. If the guy on the bike thinks the lane isn't safe he shouldn't be forced into it. You can't slow down and ride more cautious to alleviate that fear like you can with a bad road surface on the shoulder.
Exactly, but why should we be forced to ride in a shoulder that is just as unsafe? Or that the cyclist who is closer to the road is better aware of the condition of said shoulder?