We as cyclists have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers. Since when was it okay not to stop at a red light. When one person on a bicycle is doing something wrong, like running a red light or riding on the wrong side of the road it make the rest of us look bad.

Cripes I cannot believe some of the B.S. on this board when it comes to traffic laws and offenses!

You broke the law. You ran a red light. Red light means STOP not YIELD! At least that's what it meant the last time I hopped in my vehicle and went for a drive. If you were in a car would you have gone through? I doubt it. Admit you were wrong. Man up. Pay the ticket! Don't come bragging or crying to the board or whatever the purpose of starting this thread was.

<rant> As for the rest of you tough guys. You post all this crap about falsifying info to the cops, running from them and doing all kinds of other stupid sh#t. When in reality, you'd probably start to cry, whine and complain like the children you really are because you refuse to take responsibility for you actions. I know this for a fact after working closely with law enforcement for years. Punks think they're the biggest thing since Jesus H. Chirst himself, however they get arrested and cry for mommy cause they got caught. Utterly and truely pathetic really. Its always some one else's problem and not yours. Real bunch of tough guys! I'm tired of reading this machismo. Tell you what, do half the sh#t you claim to do and then post up for the board when your in jail. Then maybe I'll believe you. <end rant>

edit - I should clarify that this rant is a generalization to some of the other comments I've read elsewhere on the board. Reading too much of it lately. It doesn't help us.

Bah. I'd rather just watch for them on C.O.P.S.

sheesh, grumpy gills....

About the only circumstance under which a bicycle is allowed to "run" a red light in most places are when they have established that the light is not responding to a bicycle on the sensor, and thus faulty, and even then it's only permissable after stopping. The way I read your version of the events, you neither stopped, nor established the light was faulty. Hence you broke the law, so pay the ticket and quit whining about it.

It's a case of pay now, or pay more later. I once ditched two parking tickets in Norfolk Va. At the time (20 years ago) they were about $5 each. 3 or 4 years later I got pulled for something else, and viola, there they were. Only this time around they cost me $70!! Pay it, if not it will come back to haunt you at some point.

It's the same deal in California. A "ticket" for a moving violation is usually a "notice to appear." In other words, a court summons. When you sign the ticket, you are agreeing to appear in court on or before the date on the ticket (or admit guilt and pay a fine by mail if this option is given to you). If you fail to appear, then a warrant for your arrest will be issued. If you are later identified by the police (say for another driving infraction) you will probably be arrested, and you will have to pay extra fines. Also, a "failure to appear" will be recorded on your record, and could come back to haunt if you have legal problems in the future. (For example, if you were arrested, you could be denied bail on the grounds that you have a history of not showing up for court.) So, take a close look at the ticket you were issued. If it is indeed a "notice to appear" then you should take care of it.

pay to play, that's what they say, but play and play, and you may not live another day.

(that being said, i run reds all the time)

Be forwarned: what I'm about to say will not help anyone.

<vent>

When several hurricanes passed through Florida, they became tropical storms that passed through Atlanta. Result: tree-removal companies had a "windfall" profit.

Anyway, a very tall tree behind my house snapped at the base and was threatening my roof. It was on someone else's property. After getting no response from the land-owner, I called Dekalb County Code Enforcement (Police.)

Friday (as I started a "vacation-at-home") I found a note on my door from Dekalb County. They had been out to check out my problem. Result: I got cited. If I didn't remove the tree myself within 10 days, I'd have to pay a $1000 fine.

I called Code Enforcement. The citing officer said, [quote] "It doesn't matter that the tree is not on your property. It's your problem." Thanks...a lot.

Let me get this straight: a neighbor's tree is about to fall on my house. If I don't save my own house from my neighbor's tree, I have to pay $1000. Ok, I think I got it, now.

We pay for these folks groceries. Shouldn't they be protecting us?

</vent>

I would second the suggestion of contesting the ticket via the mail. If the officer doesn't respond, you're off the hook. If he does, you're on the same hook that you were originally on, so what do you have to lose? I would also say that, joking aside, giving a cop a name other than your own is a bad idea.

Since this has morphed into a red light discussion, I figure one good rant deserves another. You treated the red light as a yield sign. So what? Traffic lights are instruments implemented when an intersection becomes too congested for cagers to navigate without injuring one another or excessively slowing down traffic. If you treat the light as a yield sign and know how to operate your vehicle, you aren't endangering anyone and you are actually speeding up the flow of traffic. Some of us only drive bikes. We can't simply torch up some fossil fuel by slightly moving our foot everytime we want to take off from a complete stop, so we try to keep the wheels moving when it's safe to do so. Traffic laws are tailored for automobile-crowded roads because people didn't have the wisdom to foresee that the widespread use of the automobile would have deleterious social, environmental, civic, etc--effects. If the Man catches you breakin' the rules he can give you a ticket and you gotta live with it. Fine, but all this moralizing about how we have to act behave just like other vehicles get my goat, because by "vehicles" these people mean "petroleum powered passenger vehicles". I don't accept that definition, and I believe that there is a long and venerable tradition in this country that one can at the same time have respect for the Law without slavishly obeying every legislative stupidity that comes down the pipe. If a cop ever gives me a ticket, I won't give him any guff, he's doing his job to enforce the normalized standards of the age (and thank God that there are people doing that job). But many of us don't buy into those standards and instead believe that if you aren't hauling some freight or quite a few passengers around, your convenience doesn't justify climbing into a 2-ton, petrol-burning hunk of metal to ferry yo' lazy as$ around town. We get around by our own power, and we keep the wheels moving when it's safe--not when a light emitting photons in a particular visible spectrum tells us to. The overwhelming porportion of traffic laws exist to mitigate the safety problems related to our national addiction to the automobile. Don't ever do anything on your bike to endanger others by making a car slam on the brakes or swerve. Respect the safety aspect of the laws as they relate to everyone on road and walkways. While respecting these legitimate contraints for the safety of all, I for one will proudly continue to have nothing but contempt for the parts of the law which are ordered so that we can proceed with our American drive-through oblivion as conveniently as possible. Car centered life is stupidity and short-sightedness on a grand scale. Because of its grand scale I have to accept with humility that I may not be able to do much about it in a larger sense; but personally, I'll be damned if I'm going to meekly play along. Run your lights is it's safe and clear, brother.

And take care of that ticket.

[QUOTE=LittleBigMan]Be forwarned: what I'm about to say will not help anyone.

<vent>
[...]
I called Code Enforcement. The citing officer said, In this case, your beef is with the law, not law enforcement. Don't take it out on cops; they're just doing their job. If you have a problem with the law, take it up with the applicable legislative body. By the time it comes down to the cops, it's too late.

I would NOT "third" that suggestion. The OP, at least by his description (with no follow up to date?!), broke the law. Suggesting that he try to tinker with technicalities to get off does no good for the cause of Advocacy. Suck it up. If you can't do the time (pay the ticket), don't do the crime (run red lights). I have no sympathy for people wasting taxpayer dollars trying to weasel their way out of something that was their own fault.

[QUOTE=LittleBigMan]Be forwarned: what I'm about to say will not help anyone.

<vent>

When several hurricanes passed through Florida, they became tropical storms that passed through Atlanta. Result: tree-removal companies had a "windfall" profit.

Anyway, a very tall tree behind my house snapped at the base and was threatening my roof. It was on someone else's property. After getting no response from the land-owner, I called Dekalb County Code Enforcement (Police.)

Friday (as I started a "vacation-at-home") I found a note on my door from Dekalb County. They had been out to check out my problem. Result: I got cited. If I didn't remove the tree myself within 10 days, I'd have to pay a $1000 fine.

I called Code Enforcement. The citing officer said,
What the city makes you do is one thing, but if you DO pay to take the tree down, or even do it yourself, take the landowner to small claims court and see if you can recoup the expense. Find out how much it would cost to have someone take it down, and claim that, if you do it yourself.

Legal costs and court costs if the case goes against you.

You could be right, but I think it varies by country and state. Somebody helpfully posted the California laws link for the guy. The important thing is that the ticket is taken care of rather than ignored away with a wish and a prayer. Unresolved tickets come back and bite one on the posterior. Real hard. If the guy plans to keep living in California, he should take care of it.

Thanks for all the responses. I didnt realize the post had switched forums...
Anyway, a few things, I wasnt whining about anything. I broke the law, I knew what I was doing before I was busted, and I never tried to tell the officer I wasnt guilty. I did tell him I didnt think the situation warranted a ticket, and tried to explain my reasoning and perspective. But of course he simply gave me the "just doing my job" lines, which is true, tho I dont agree with it. So I took the ticket and continued to working, running as many lights as I could on the way.
Anthony King posted (#35) the basic response I was going to make to all the people replying about the immorality of running a red light.
The real issue is I'm not in a car, I'm on a bike. It's silly to force bikes to follow car laws. There are some situations that require different reactions and responses.
To all the red light nay sayers, I ride a bike for the specific reason of being able to blow stop signs and red lights, as well as zipping in between rush hour traffic. If I want to sit and wait for lights to change colors to tell me what I'm allowed to do, I'd drive a car. I'm not saying everyone on a bike should have this mentality, people should ride in whatever manner is comfortable and enjoyable for them. But dont think you're taking some higher moral ground by sitting at a red light. And please dont attack people who like a bike (and not a car), on the grounds of a "negative image about bikers" because the problem is the law is not representative of the needs of a certain population (in this case bikes).
As far as the ticket, I posted because I've never received a ticket on a bike before. I was curious of what kind of ramifications there are. I'll be contesting the ticket.
And to the question of where this was, SoCal baby. specifically San Diego. Theres one cop, by the name of officer Thompson, known by all the local bikers, thats out to give as many bike tickets as possible. No other officers care, they realize being on a bike puts you in a different situation than in a car, so if you're running a light with no cross traffic, no ones the worse. And beyond that, they have more important things to be doing than busting a biker. How many cars made some kind of illegal manuver in the amount of time it took the cop to write up my ticket? And I wonder how many shootings and robberies were occurring on the other side of downtown. But this cop likes to hang around where the messengers are, just so he can teach them a lesson about following the traffic laws. Doesnt seem like the best allocation of tax funds.

I never argue with police. I thanked the officer.

But everything I've read so far shows:

a) The owner of the tree would have been responsible if it fell on my house.
b) My insurance company would have paid for damages to my house, then seek to recoup the cost from the owner of the tree.
c) If I decided not to let the tree fall on my house, the only course of action would have been Code Enforcement, who should have cited the owner of the tree.

I chose to protect my family. Who is protecting me?

I think it was wrong. Period.

I will probably seek compensation from the owner of the tree in court. But that has to wait until I finish suing the tree-removal company that crushed my driveway while removing the tree. That could take months.

If I were to get a ticket while on my bike for blowing a stop sign or red light or whatever, would it affect my car insurance rates?

Bravo. This is one of the more fantastic things I've read in a long long time.

A great quote I once heard:

"Rules were invented for the obedience of fools and the guidance of the wise".

God you guys go on with a lot of crap.

With all due respect, I suggest you stop riding. If you keep riding, I wish you many tickets and sky-high insurance rates. If you fight tickets you deserve, I hope they tack on hundreds of dollars of costs.

Some cycling laws are stupid (as far right as practicticable and mandatory side path laws come to mind), but stop sign and red light laws are essential to keeping traffic flowing safely. The one thing cops could do to make cycling safer is to annouce that they will aggressively ticket all red light and stop sign violations (cars and bikes), and then to back up that annoucement with a blizzard of tickets.

Edit: Actually, I don't hope that you quit riding, but I do hope that you quit riding dangerously.

Okay, time for my rant.

Red lights and stop signs are essential to keeping traffic flowing safely when they are installed at locations that warrant them. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Traffic engineers (as much as everyone hates them) have a set of warrants they use to determine whether or not an all-way stop or traffic signal is needed at an intersection. It is based on a number of things, but mostly on the volume of traffic (in most places in Ontario, that includes bike traffic as well).

However, Politicians frequently cave in to resident wishes and put in all-way stops or traffic signals where they are not needed. This is particularly true of all-way stop signs. They are frequently used as a cheap way to try to get that one cager out of 100 that comes barrelling down the street at 40 mph to slow down. The result is roads with stop sign, after stop sign, after stop sign, with NO traffic at the intersections. So, because a couple of cagers can't manage to drive in a reasonably safe way through a neighbourhood, you make cyclists come to a full and complete stop every 60 m.

Drivers and cyclists aren't stupid.. after you've driven through an intersection a couple of times and have yet to come to a full and complete stop for anything other than a diagnostic check of your brakes, why do you keep stopping?

And whaddaya know? At intersections where all way stop signs don't meet those Traffic Engineering warrants, almost nobody bothers to stop. In fact, what they've found happens is that while vehicle speeds slow down near the intersection, they actually go up mid-block... cars slow down for the intersection, then jam the gas until the next stop sign. If you put up enough unwarranted stops in a City, people get so sick of seeing stop signs that they stop respecting them... even the ones that ARE warranted.

This isn't to say that I want cars blowing by me at 80 mph on residential streets, but there are many many better ways to control speed than stop signs.

This is less true with red lights... at over $100,000 a pop a city will rarely put them in in a stupid place, but it happens. If people complain loud enough, almost anything is possible.

So, we can be idealistic and say that everyone should come to a full and complete stop for every stop sign and red light every time, but when you're bombarded with a crappy design, day in and day out, it gets incredibly frustrating.

I agree that some stop signs and lights are stupidly placed, but the comment I responded to said that the cyclist rode a bike specifically so he could blow "stop signs and red lights." He also said he did not want to follow the same rules as cars.

When I ask for aggressive enforcement, the cops should intelligently pick the intersections to target. And, for ticket purposes, the cops should treat cyclists the same as drivers of cars.

Fair enough.

I too hope police choose to selectively enforce stop signs. However, the thing that often determines where police get sent is the intersection stopping compliance; i.e. the percentage of vehicles that actually come to a complete stop... Guess which intersections have the lowest rates of compliance .

When I was a student living in Hamilton Ontario, one of the main roads into the school (Sterling, for those familiar) was residential that had both students and well-off profs, exec's etc. living on it. The well-off folks managed to convince the City to put stop all-way stops at every intersection... and of course, no one bothered stopping. So, soon enough the cops started showing up.. and targetting cyclists!!!!! (Guess which group travels by bike more... students or well-off profs?) Unbelievable.

About 3yrs. ago I was out cycling one weekend. Was at a light with no traffic around which turned green. I proceeded and just as I entered intersection a cyclist coming the other way came right at me (running the red) and I hit the ground hard swerving to miss him - he didn't even stop and yelled something like 'watch it'. I hope all cyclists who run reds like this get the full law applied - it is reckless and threatens the lives of others.

Al