Sooner Rider

Increased ridership is up nationwide, and that trend is sure to continue. I don't want this thread to deal with how cyclists interact with motorists, but one which addresses how a law enforcement agency can establish departmental guidlines for interacting with cyclists who violate the law. Two questions come quickly to mind:

When members of a large group violate a law - blowing through a stop sign for instance - who gets stopped and cited?
In most states cyclists aren't required to carry a driver's license or government-issued ID, so how does an officer ascertain identity when writing a citation?

If you were the city manager or police chief, how would you establish criteria for dealing with greater numbers of cyclists, many of whom violate the law and pose a risk to themselves or others through intent or ignorance?

Finally, what role does the government have in educating bicyclists so that they become better and safer users of the roads, every cyclist from children to a homeless guy to commuters and those on a club ride?

myrridin

Consider those large groups, who usually are riding in a paceline, which is defined by being close enough to receive benefit from drafting. I believe all (or at least most) states have language in their traffic code along the line of "must maintain safe following distance"... I personally look forward to that existing regulation being used to prohibit such group rides, whose stated purpose is to ride in a paceline..

As to id, I believe you are required to give the officer your name if asked, and they are empowered to detail anyone who doesn't until such time as id can be made. Of course, most dl agencies also offer picture id (which is generally a must in today's society) and it wouldn't be a leap to require cyclists to carry such.

TheHen

First of all, let's make note of the fact that motorists are currently breaking the law on a regular basis and are killing people by the tens of thousands each year and maiming people by the millions each year. It's not like replacing scofflaw motorists with scofflaw cyclists really poses a public health hazard; it is rather the opposite. Face it, most folks ride like they drive. (See the recent kerfuffle regarding red light cameras in CA for a bit of evidence that motorists are indeed aware of their lawless ways.)

It is so bad that local jurisdictions are required to prove there is some unfixable safety need in order to set the speed limit on a road below the speed that 85% of the cars are traveling. Cops aren't even allowed to use radar to cite motorists below that speed. In other words, they move as a pack well above the posted speed limit and the law protects them from citation. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but if we allowed packs of cyclists the same leeway there is clearly a precedent for it, albeit a much more deadly one.

Back to what law enforcement might consider doing if we actually do replace a significant number of cars with bikes. This already happened in one place in America for a brief time, about one decade. I lived there while it was at its peak and watched the bikes disappear. Here's how cops dealt with a 90% modal bike share:
1. They had a zero-tolerance approach to moving violations for both cyclists and motorists. This was actually key to getting people to feel safe enough on the roads to ride. This did require that many cops forgo the patrol car in favor of a patrol bike, but that also made them much more effective at spotting crimes since they could see and hear better. It had an added benefit that when they pulled over motorists for moving violations they often caught burglars before the crime had even been reported (criminals drive like criminals).
2. Identification isn't that big a deal. If the cop wants to write a ticket, he/she has the authority to arrest someone and hold them pending identification. This tends to encourage people to both ride lawfully and to carry identification.

Being a cop is a whole lot easier when cycling dominates the transportation scene. The most dangerous task in law enforcement is pulling over a motor vehicle, which is probably why traffic stops have become so rare these days. Pulling over a cyclist just doesn't have the same risks since you can easily see if the person being stopped is reaching for or already holding a weapon. I would think that most cops would welcome the change and very few would pine for the "good old days" of everyone in a car.

Omiak

I think the fact that cars are the number one cause of death for young people (ages 11-24) in the entire world whereas bicycles are essentially negligible in this regard should factor into the decisions behind enforcement. The idea that we're all users of the road and should be treated equally is totally ignoring the statistical realities of how much damage a bicycle can do vs a car. Might as well advocate for increased police perseverance about jaywalking while your at it.

mtbikerinpa

I for one would welcome an increased presence on both aspects of road use. In the current state funding levels the policing of local roads in pa has been dismal at best. They stay to the big roads and hot spots and that in turn makes the regulars reroute to the side roads(where we prefer to ride).

If both cyclists and car drivers are subject to a regular accountability I think it could in fact help relations between the parties since a great deal of drivers that I have talked to(who aren't friends or informed) think the current system is double standarding and being lenient on bikes. Hence they have a resentment, unfounded as it may be.

spivonious

Typically the last person in line. It works this way with speeding groups of cars on a highway. The policeman can take his pick on who to ticket.
You must give an officer your real name. Otherwise he can detain you until proper ID is made.
I'm not sure why extra criteria is needed. Traffic laws are traffic laws, regardless of whether the vehicle is a car, a tractor, a horse-and-buggy, or a bicycle.
My township offers a bicycle safety course that covers maintenance, rules of the road, safe riding, etc.. I wouldn't be surprised if a similar course became mandatory should cyclists become the primary users of the road.

myrridin

This is only the case in certain states, not all.

As for the rest of your diatribe, it is patently ridiculous. Violations of the law should be prosecuted. They don't have to nab all the violators, just a percentage to provide incentive to limit the crime...

Omiak

So we should increase police scrutiny on cyclists in order to appease an uninformed resentment?

Chris516

Expand the scope of the thread, by covering the issue of law enforcement agencies and DOTs' marginalizing the existence of cyclists' on the road, by treating motorists' treatment of cyclists', as an annoyance, instead of serious traffic infraction. Along with LE agencies treating a cyclist death, like an anachronism, instead of something important.

Omiak

But the amount of potential damage done varies vastly between a car, a tractor, a horse-and-buggy, or a bicycle. Shouldn't the law reflect that? It feels to me like saying "gun control laws apply to everyone whether you own a slingshot or a high powered fully automatic assault rifle laws apply to everyone."

CB HI

The horror of some cyclist rolling through stop signs and riding in pacelines. The huge numbers of deaths caused by these cyclist must end. It is time to prioritize the duties of thousands of cops on the beat to handle this extreme danger and outrage. We must make our streets safe and end cyclist rolling stop signs even if they almost never hit anyone and especially end those paceline riding cyclist.

CB HI

Why do you hate other cyclist so much?

myrridin

I despise group riders for precisely the same reason you and so many others on this board hate 'JAM's' and 'cagers', they put me at risk when I ride. I rarely have a problem with motorists when I ride, but on spring, summer, and fall weekends, I will invariably have close calls because of group riders who behave abysmally.

The typical pattern is. I will be riding along just right of center. Without warning I will then be passed in close proximate (<1ft) by pairs of cyclists who then move directly in front of me sometime passing within inches of my front wheel. Most of the time the pair pass on my left, but occasionally they will split and pass on both sides. And occasionally they will call out within a second or so of passing in such aggregious manner. Never do they slow, allowing me time to move to the right and yield sufficient room for them to pass.

The above happens between two and three times a month--in the summer. With motorists I have problems on average three times a year... For that reason, I try to schedule my routes and riding times to avoid the self-entitled idiots.

So, no I don't have a problem with cyclists in general, just those with the sole purpose to make use of the activity to 'draft' and hence violate the law. For the rest, they are just like motorists-mostly okay, but all break the law fairly regularly.

spivonious

Should the law reflect that? No. It would be incredibly confusing. Do 18-wheelers have different laws? Do motorcyclists have different laws? There is one vehicle code and everyone has to follow it if you want to drive on public roads.

A pistol can kill someone just as easily as an assault rifle.

The vehicle code exists to provide a safe network of roadways by enforcing speed, lane change procedures, obeying of traffic signals, etc.. It has nothing to do with the amount of damage inflicted in an accident. Personally, I would be mortified if I hit a cyclist with my car because he ran a stop sign, as there is a real potential for serious injury. If I hit another car, the chance of damage to the vehicle is higher, but the driver inside will most likely be fine.

genec

Good one dude... oh the horror.

genec

The problem is you are comparing heavy motorized vehicles to light human power vehicles... much like comparing thrown rocks to pistols or assault rifles.

Try to keep the apples to oranges at least in the same ball park.

I can stop a bicycle with a fairly decent body check... I challenge you to do the same with any motorized vehicle.

Commodus

Surely law enforcement would be a whole lot easier if we had more bikes on the road. The potential mayhem caused by a high speed bike chase is...uh, minimal.

Plus, said chases would do wonders to keep our police force in shape!

lostarchitect 

Not a good example. There are different laws concerning different types of firearms.

dougmc

What makes you think this is a new question?

Police departments generally already have guidelines for dealing with cyclists. In general, they're very similar to the guidelines for dealing with motorists.

Well, if members of a large group of motorists violate a law [and this is seen by a cop], who gets stopped? The answer is, whomever the cop wants to -- but it usually turns out to be the guy the cop can most easily pull over. Sometimes a cop is particularly gung-ho and can can pull over the entire group or several members of the group, be it a group of cars or bikes.

Well, how does an officer ascertain the identity of a motorist who doesn't have their wallet on them? How does he do it if it's a pedestrian caught jaywalking?

Answer, they ask and then look stuff up to confirm. It's already illegal in every state that I know of to lie to the officer about who you are, and the cop can easily verify things, probably even pulling up a picture of your ID card on his computer. The motorist might get a ticket for not having their license on them, but if the cop can verify that they do in fact own a valid license, that's kind of silly even if the law explicitly requires that they have their license, and in general they can take it down to the courthouse and have the charges dropped.

That's a heavily loaded question, isn't it?

How did the city manager or police chief establish criteria for dealing with greater numbers of motorists, many of whom violate the law and pose a risk to themselves or others through intent or ignorance? If such criteria exists, use them unless there's some reason they don't make sense with cyclists.

Well, what role does the government have in educating motorists so that they become better and safer users of the roads, every motorist from sixteen year olds to a homeless guy to commuters and those on a club drive?

These aren't new questions -- in general, they've already been answered for both motorists and cyclists. If you want to know how your local police department has answered them -- call them up and ask!

njkayaker

They are doing it wrong. There's no requirement to ride that way when riding in a group (my groups don't do it).

myrridin

I completely agree; however, It is a rare group ride which doesn't ride in a paceline (at least in my area). And that is illegal in most (if not all states) when view from the perspective of a law requiring safe following distance. My previous post about the behavior of groups in my area was mostly to answer the question as to why I disliked such groups... That dislike is why I have been searching for legal ways to curtail their activity.

We don't need communities banning cyclists from the roads, but we can use existing laws to ban groups that cause problems.

njkayaker

Ahh, you want to use a law as a stick against some other, unrelated behavior. That is a bit unbalanced (in my opinion).

Ninety5rpm

I don't believe that part I've put in bold is accurate. I've never heard of anyone cited for riding in a paceline. I've been told that the "safe following distance" law applies to motor vehicles, not to vehicles in general, or to bicycles in particular. As others have noted, there is a big distinction between human-powered bicycles and motor vehicles, and this appears to be reflected in the law, where it matters. Racing also is only illegal for motor vehicles, not for bicycles, I believe. But check the law in your state to be sure.

njkayaker

The CA "following too closely" law only applies to motor vehicles.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21703.htm

John Forester

So myrridin demands that he be warned (shout, bell, siren?) before he is overtaken by other cyclists, or, at least, by groups of other cyclists, and given time to move to the right edge of the roadway to let them come past. Why? The only reason that he gives is that he does not like to be overtaken without warning. Myrridin, just grow up. It is normal for slower drivers to be overtaken by faster drivers; as long as this is done safely, it is just a normal part of driving. Of course, it is also the expected normal for any driver to keep going straight unless he scans the new line of travel and yields to others in that line who are so close as to constitute a danger. So, Myrridin, just keep holding a straight line and let those faster than you come past.