6 ms·

The whole idea that bicyclists somehow are above the law in terms of traffic signals needs to end. We need to start stopping at red lights and stop signs if we

by debt 13y ago

The whole idea that bicyclists somehow are above the law in terms of traffic signals needs to end. We need to start stopping at red lights and stop signs if we're ever to be taken seriously. Time and again I've had conversations with bicyclists friends of mine who are adamant about how helmets are as optional as obeying traffic signals; it's totally hypocritical and asinine. They knowingly break the laws then bitch about the police. These are, by the way, people who are very adamantly against "1 percenters" which, I don't know if you've heard, also knowingly break the law on a federal level all the time and expect to get away with it. The hypocrisy runs deep. Anytime I get pulled by a cop I just assume they're already pissed off so I act accordingly. I'm not going to obviously break the law and then have the balls to give them a hard time about what they are and aren't allowed to do. I just broke the law by blowing a stop sign. It's just such a mind-numbingly privileged viewpoint to think I can break the law and expect to just get away with it. I'd expect that out of some white collar criminal or something, but not Joe the cyclist. All because you blew a red light, which by the way is basically instantly a ticket if you're in a car, and couldn't immediately admit wrongdoing and move on. Sorry, if you were a buddy of mine telling me that story, I'd tell you you were a moron for deciding to "educate" the police officer. Smart move bro.

andrewfelix 13y ago
The post has absolutely nothing to do with cyclists being above the law. Neither do your personal anecdotes about cyclists. Try not make generalisations about groups of people based on your narrow experience.
- debt 13y ago
  Cyclist breaks the law and then feels entitled to talk down the arresting officers? I can't say it's the first time I've heard this story.
  - andrewfelix 13y ago
    Replace the word 'cyclist' with 'driver', 'woman', 'jew' etc. See where I'm going with this? Your anecdotes are not evidence of a larger problem. All that you're doing is exposing your personal bias. Personally I notice a lot of bad drivers, but I'm not going to then leap to the ridiculous conclusion that drivers think they're above the law. Because there is larger percentage that I don't notice doing the right thing, just like with [insert chosen group here].
    - debt 13y ago
      We're talking about people with a preference for bicycles not their religion, race or gender. And, yeah, you could replace it with driver, that one at least is valid. I don't know if you've heard of this rift between cyclists and motorists but it gets pretty heated and intense in urban areas. Typically the people pushing for legislative changes and updates to infrastructure are cyclists. Typically, those cyclists are the militant ones and NOT your "A-to-B style cyclists, just going to and from work with a bike, yeah a bike lane would be nice but whatever"-style cyclists. Many of the militant cyclists hold an attitude similar to parent, which is "yeah I broke the law but fuck the police" which makes it very difficult to enact any change. I'm talking specifically about the militant cyclists which, like I said, are also the ones attempting to push the cause, enact positive changes, for cyclists. So. We can't have MILITANT cyclists(again the ones doing the walking when it comes to updating infrastructure etc.) pervade an attitude that they're above the law because surprise no one will take them seriously and thus no positive changes for cyclists.
      - andrewfelix 13y ago
        >We're talking about people with a preference for bicycles not their religion, race or gender You're missing the point. I'm talking about your personal experiences not speaking to a larger issue. You've clearly had negative interactions with cyclists that have helped you arrive at your view, that isn't in dispute here. What I'm trying to say is don't apply your narrow vision on what is a diverse group of people, the majority of whom obey the law and make a positive contribution to society. Again; Your personal observations do not equate to evidence of a widespread problem, just as my negative interactions with red haired people does equate to evidence of a MILITANT Ginger brigade out to do harm.
      - angersock 13y ago
        In your desire to complain about cyclists (rightly or wrongly) you are blind to the abuse of a citizen that happened here.
        subpixel 13y ago
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - benched 13y ago
    You are conflating several things and speaking rhetorically, not logically. Here's what you want: "Vehicle operator runs a red light and is arrested"
coldtea 13y ago
>All because you blew a red light, which by the way is basically instantly a ticket if you're in a car, and couldn't immediately admit wrongdoing and move on. Sorry, if you were a buddy of mine telling me that story, I'd tell you you were a moron for deciding to "educate" the police officer. So, the "american way" you propose is to BEND OVER and take abuse and injustice from police officers? You sure are pragmatic -- but I would hate to live in your world.
- wutbrodo 13y ago
  The abuse and injustice is irrelevant at that point because it hasn't happened. What 'debt' is saying is that it was a stupid reaction to getting stopped for a red light violation, not that the abuse that followed was justified. Those two views are not contradictory.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >What 'debt' is saying is that it was a stupid reaction to getting stopped for a red light violation Besides getting stopped for a traffic violation he was asked to provide something that was not mandatory by law. Even worse, the policemen cited the law wrongly (and for something quite basic). This is indefensible. But that's beside the point. I take offense with the notion against his "stupid reaction" in general. What this talk about "stupid reaction" reveals is a citizenry that is conditioned to receive all kinds of abuse from police officers and to blindly obey orders, to avoid getting on their nerves. He should be allowed to have any kind of "stupid reaction". He should be allowed to voice his protests and discuss the matter without being hailed to jail. There's nothing "throw him in jail" about "trying to educate a police officer". In every country with a civilized police force (at least in Western Europe), that is in any country where police is catering to citizens and not barking at peasants, you CAN have all kind of "stupid reactions" when talking to the police and you don't get beaten or thrown in jail for it (at least not as a regular occurence -- it might happen from time to time). That you can casually get shot for reaching for your mobile phone or tased just because you said something to protest being asked to leave some place, is something that just does not happen. Even the "hands on the dashboard" and "don't get out of the car when pulled over or you'll might get shot" routines are unheard of. Perhaps it's time to demand more courtesy from the police, instead of taking for granted having to be all too cautious whenever they appear.
nopassrecover 13y ago
How is this in any way related to the parent comment? He did not contest the traffic offence at any point. He did contest the requirement to carry ID and was then punished for raising his rights.
- debt 13y ago
  My point is, why contest anything in that moment? You just broke the law and could've potentially caused serious bodily harm to someone. I feel like there's a small window an officer gives you to get out of the ticket. They walk up. They ask you what you did wrong. You tell them. Everyone moves on. Sometimes they write a ticket or a warning. Parent dude completely and intentionally overcomplicated the situation. Wasting his own time and the time of the officers.
  - benched 13y ago
    What I hear you saying is that you enjoy the somewhat arbitrary primate street rules that apply to interacting with people who have more power than you, and you'd rather live by those rules than laws.
    - meddlepal 13y ago
      Those primitive and brutish rules are sometimes easier to understand and follow compared to the complex legal spiderweb we have created.
  - nopassrecover 13y ago
    In terms of practicality "shut up and don't ask questions" is certainly going to be minimum hassle. But when the police threatened additional punishments for not having his ID he was perfectly justified in questioning them on the legitimacy of that claim. Acting within your rights shouldn't be punished because it's inconvenient.
    - debt 13y ago
      I agree, but like some other commenter said about hackers needing a reality check; only the most disconnected of people would attempt to "educate" a police officer about the law. Why would he do that? I'm not justifying the officer's reaction, but, really, what did he think was going to happen? Most officers probably just aren't in the mood to deal with your shit; I'm not saying that's a good thing I'm just saying it's the reality of the situation. Aside from all that, aren't us hackers trained to never say a damn word to a police officer let alone "educate" them about anything?
fuckpig 13y ago
> The whole idea that bicyclists somehow are above the law in terms of traffic signals needs to end. We need to start stopping at red lights and stop signs if we're ever to be taken seriously. I would like this too. I've seen multiple accidents caused by selfish and arrogant bike riders, motorcyclists and pedestrians. This is in addition to the single persons -- it's always just one in the vehicle -- who drive gigantic SUVs and assume that it's my job to stay out of their way, even when I have the right of way and am trying to do something like drive from point A to point B down the street. Silly me, I should be second-class to them because I didn't buy a giant SUV.
devin 13y ago
Shamefully public lack of empathy and holier than thou attitude, "bro".
- debt 13y ago
  I'm empathetic towards how shitty the process he went through, that sucks. But there's no need to make a bad situation worse which is what he "stupidly" did; so says him.

by debt 13y ago

andrewfelix 13y ago

The post has absolutely nothing to do with cyclists being above the law. Neither do your personal anecdotes about cyclists. Try not make generalisations about groups of people based on your narrow experience.

debt 13y ago
Cyclist breaks the law and then feels entitled to talk down the arresting officers? I can't say it's the first time I've heard this story.
- andrewfelix 13y ago
  Replace the word 'cyclist' with 'driver', 'woman', 'jew' etc. See where I'm going with this? Your anecdotes are not evidence of a larger problem. All that you're doing is exposing your personal bias. Personally I notice a lot of bad drivers, but I'm not going to then leap to the ridiculous conclusion that drivers think they're above the law. Because there is larger percentage that I don't notice doing the right thing, just like with [insert chosen group here].
  - debt 13y ago
    We're talking about people with a preference for bicycles not their religion, race or gender. And, yeah, you could replace it with driver, that one at least is valid. I don't know if you've heard of this rift between cyclists and motorists but it gets pretty heated and intense in urban areas. Typically the people pushing for legislative changes and updates to infrastructure are cyclists. Typically, those cyclists are the militant ones and NOT your "A-to-B style cyclists, just going to and from work with a bike, yeah a bike lane would be nice but whatever"-style cyclists. Many of the militant cyclists hold an attitude similar to parent, which is "yeah I broke the law but fuck the police" which makes it very difficult to enact any change. I'm talking specifically about the militant cyclists which, like I said, are also the ones attempting to push the cause, enact positive changes, for cyclists. So. We can't have MILITANT cyclists(again the ones doing the walking when it comes to updating infrastructure etc.) pervade an attitude that they're above the law because surprise no one will take them seriously and thus no positive changes for cyclists.
    - andrewfelix 13y ago
      >We're talking about people with a preference for bicycles not their religion, race or gender You're missing the point. I'm talking about your personal experiences not speaking to a larger issue. You've clearly had negative interactions with cyclists that have helped you arrive at your view, that isn't in dispute here. What I'm trying to say is don't apply your narrow vision on what is a diverse group of people, the majority of whom obey the law and make a positive contribution to society. Again; Your personal observations do not equate to evidence of a widespread problem, just as my negative interactions with red haired people does equate to evidence of a MILITANT Ginger brigade out to do harm.
    - angersock 13y ago
      In your desire to complain about cyclists (rightly or wrongly) you are blind to the abuse of a citizen that happened here.
      - subpixel 13y ago
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- benched 13y ago
  You are conflating several things and speaking rhetorically, not logically. Here's what you want: "Vehicle operator runs a red light and is arrested"

coldtea 13y ago

>All because you blew a red light, which by the way is basically instantly a ticket if you're in a car, and couldn't immediately admit wrongdoing and move on. Sorry, if you were a buddy of mine telling me that story, I'd tell you you were a moron for deciding to "educate" the police officer. So, the "american way" you propose is to BEND OVER and take abuse and injustice from police officers? You sure are pragmatic -- but I would hate to live in your world.

wutbrodo 13y ago
The abuse and injustice is irrelevant at that point because it hasn't happened. What 'debt' is saying is that it was a stupid reaction to getting stopped for a red light violation, not that the abuse that followed was justified. Those two views are not contradictory.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >What 'debt' is saying is that it was a stupid reaction to getting stopped for a red light violation Besides getting stopped for a traffic violation he was asked to provide something that was not mandatory by law. Even worse, the policemen cited the law wrongly (and for something quite basic). This is indefensible. But that's beside the point. I take offense with the notion against his "stupid reaction" in general. What this talk about "stupid reaction" reveals is a citizenry that is conditioned to receive all kinds of abuse from police officers and to blindly obey orders, to avoid getting on their nerves. He should be allowed to have any kind of "stupid reaction". He should be allowed to voice his protests and discuss the matter without being hailed to jail. There's nothing "throw him in jail" about "trying to educate a police officer". In every country with a civilized police force (at least in Western Europe), that is in any country where police is catering to citizens and not barking at peasants, you CAN have all kind of "stupid reactions" when talking to the police and you don't get beaten or thrown in jail for it (at least not as a regular occurence -- it might happen from time to time). That you can casually get shot for reaching for your mobile phone or tased just because you said something to protest being asked to leave some place, is something that just does not happen. Even the "hands on the dashboard" and "don't get out of the car when pulled over or you'll might get shot" routines are unheard of. Perhaps it's time to demand more courtesy from the police, instead of taking for granted having to be all too cautious whenever they appear.

nopassrecover 13y ago

How is this in any way related to the parent comment? He did not contest the traffic offence at any point. He did contest the requirement to carry ID and was then punished for raising his rights.

debt 13y ago
My point is, why contest anything in that moment? You just broke the law and could've potentially caused serious bodily harm to someone. I feel like there's a small window an officer gives you to get out of the ticket. They walk up. They ask you what you did wrong. You tell them. Everyone moves on. Sometimes they write a ticket or a warning. Parent dude completely and intentionally overcomplicated the situation. Wasting his own time and the time of the officers.
- benched 13y ago
  What I hear you saying is that you enjoy the somewhat arbitrary primate street rules that apply to interacting with people who have more power than you, and you'd rather live by those rules than laws.
  - meddlepal 13y ago
    Those primitive and brutish rules are sometimes easier to understand and follow compared to the complex legal spiderweb we have created.
- nopassrecover 13y ago
  In terms of practicality "shut up and don't ask questions" is certainly going to be minimum hassle. But when the police threatened additional punishments for not having his ID he was perfectly justified in questioning them on the legitimacy of that claim. Acting within your rights shouldn't be punished because it's inconvenient.
  - debt 13y ago
    I agree, but like some other commenter said about hackers needing a reality check; only the most disconnected of people would attempt to "educate" a police officer about the law. Why would he do that? I'm not justifying the officer's reaction, but, really, what did he think was going to happen? Most officers probably just aren't in the mood to deal with your shit; I'm not saying that's a good thing I'm just saying it's the reality of the situation. Aside from all that, aren't us hackers trained to never say a damn word to a police officer let alone "educate" them about anything?

fuckpig 13y ago

> The whole idea that bicyclists somehow are above the law in terms of traffic signals needs to end. We need to start stopping at red lights and stop signs if we're ever to be taken seriously. I would like this too. I've seen multiple accidents caused by selfish and arrogant bike riders, motorcyclists and pedestrians. This is in addition to the single persons -- it's always just one in the vehicle -- who drive gigantic SUVs and assume that it's my job to stay out of their way, even when I have the right of way and am trying to do something like drive from point A to point B down the street. Silly me, I should be second-class to them because I didn't buy a giant SUV.

devin 13y ago

Shamefully public lack of empathy and holier than thou attitude, "bro".

debt 13y ago
I'm empathetic towards how shitty the process he went through, that sucks. But there's no need to make a bad situation worse which is what he "stupidly" did; so says him.