First, we're not as far off each other as we're thinking (or so i gather). It seems, if i read you right that you're refering more to the original poster than other people's responses (or perhaps we are referring to completely different resposes) but for clarity,
Originally Posted by zwxetlp
Ummm, Ok. I'm not sure what I CAN, but this is just a circular way of avoiding the question I posed. Why would you believe that bikes are exempt from the laws of both pedestrians and traffic?
"you CAN" refered to receiving jaywalking tickets.
Originally Posted by zwxetlp
Apparently not. Some people go on thar interweb and exclaim that their freedoms have been violated!
For the people who think they can do anything they please, yeah they're morons.
Originally Posted by zwxetlp
Yes, for the most part. Why would it not be reasonable? Even with the <sarcastic>outrageous</sarcastic> enforcement noted in this article, holding bicycles to the traffic laws designed for cars is really not much more than asking for you to play nice and respect others. It appears to me that you believe that if special code of laws was for some reason made specifically for cyclists, it might actually be open for debate whether or not bicyclists would need to stop for red lights and stop signs? WOW!
yeah i mean you're refering to the article whereas i'm talking about laws in general.
My point was that yeah, all these laws exist. However, throughout history, there have been laws enacted that haven't made much sense; others are misguided. Slowing at a red light and then going through it when no traffic is present (and therefore not hindered or obstructed), while against the law doesn't really have much to do with playing nice and respecting others. Ultimately, the way i see it, is that the law is there because there is no way to write a law that would allow the behavior i'm describing without it being flagrantly abused. Thus, the policy is that it is generally allowed unless it is abused and you get a ticket. My problem with the policies in the article are that it appears that they are cracking down with no leeway. I don't approve of that. I think its sort of like parking laws. Its technically an illegal parking job if your car goes an inch past the "no parking" sign but people would definately complain if their car was towed or ticketed for that inch.
If the cyclist's behavior doesn't affect traffic, why does it matter? (try to refrain from an "its still against the law response")