8 ms·

Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

162 points by vermontdevil 12y ago

gohrt 12y ago
It's not a mathematical error when the number is completely fabricated to justify a policy change. That's just lying.
- thenmar 12y ago
  It's not really a policy change though is it? Aren't they enforcing laws that cyclists previously were breaking with impunity? I would like them to show their work too, but I don't really see the policy conspiracy angle to this.
  - dead10ck 12y ago
    Exactly. No policies are changing. They're just putting more resources into enforcing existing laws.
    - lil_cain 12y ago
      That is a policy change. Policy and law are not the same thing.
    - thrownaway2424 12y ago
      They're rearranging the same resources from enforcing something else to enforcing traffic laws against bicyclists.
      - seanp2k2 12y ago
        Because obviously, this is NYC's biggest problem. I can see the headlines now: "Cyclist Moving Violation Crime Wave Hits as Snowfall Begins, but NYPD Strikes Back"
  - hoopism 12y ago
    It's not like police are an inexhaustible resource. Resources allocated in one realm means a dip in another. Using bad stats to justify a reallocation should be alarming to local residents.
    - thenmar 12y ago
      Are they actually allocating resources for this? I read it as the police would no longer be giving people a free pass where they used to
  - iquantny 12y ago
    Policy is not the same as law. A police department can have a policy on how to distribute resources....
  - mikegillman 12y ago
    So why bother to fabricate reasoning behind their actions?
  - seanp2k2 12y ago
    Not sure about NY laws, but other states allow "Idaho stops" (treating stop signs as yields on bikes): http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/more-idaho-stop-and-why-cyclists-should-be-able-roll-through-stop-signs.html http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/more-idaho-stop-and-why-cycl... If you've ever commuted via bike, you probably understand how little sense it makes to stop at every sign and roll no lights.
  - wanderingstan 12y ago
    Most auto drivers, myself included, regularly (and with impunity) break the law against driving over the speed limit. If police announced they intend to start ticketing people for even 1-9mpg speeding violations, we would all agree this was a massive "policy change." (Note that I'm not saying that these law breaking activities are equivalent; only that there are a multitude of laws that are not enforced, and a change in enforcement is indeed a policy change.)
coldcode 12y ago
Big data does not mean big lies. If you make policy based on analyzing data you should be required to show your work.
- tedunangst 12y ago
  Obvious solution: they start (continue) making policy without analyzing the data.
dead10ck 12y ago
Even if the numbers are completely made up, I'm not going to be outraged that police decided to enforce laws that cyclists need to be abiding by anyway.
- thrownaway2424 12y ago
  It's about the opportunity cost. What other thing could the police be doing instead of giving traffic tickets to cyclists? After all, the best case outcome of doing so is to reduce pedestrian injuries from 1 per year to 0 per year, which isn't much of a benefit. 16000 people were injured and 178 killed by cars in NYC in 2013. That's a much richer hunting ground for police activity.
  - tedunangst 12y ago
    "Stop turning a blind eye" doesn't require that many new resources to enforce. The only opportunity cost is the time it takes the officer to write the ticket, which isn't much.
    - thrownaway2424 12y ago
      NYPD says they don't even have the resources to investigate fatal car crashes. They didn't bother investigating the death of a three year old girl in a crosswalk this year. The driver didn't even get so much as a ticket. If there's some cop standing around with nothing to do I'm sure they could be assigned to look into the fifty pedestrian injury collisions that happen every day in New York.
      - avn2109 12y ago
        >> "If there's some cop standing around with nothing to do..." Honestly, I have (almost) only ever seen NYPD officers standing around with nothing to do. I don't know if that's because they are drastically overmanned or because they intentionally deploy loafing cops for the deterrent effect.
hoopism 12y ago
Doesn't appear to be any flawed math here... just flawed PR. Not like somebody missed a decimal point. Based on my comprehensive understanding (watched The Wire and read articles), made up stats and policing are old buddies.
peapicker 12y ago
Could also be that they are only looking at the subset of collisions involving bicycles where the cyclist was determined to be at fault, which isn't data available in the analysis given here.
Disruptive_Dave 12y ago
They actually started towards the end of the summer, at least here in Brooklyn. Hadn't seen a biker get pulled over for things like not coming to a complete halt at stops signs in 3 years I've been here. Witnessed about 5 of them in the span of 3 weeks, heard about plenty more. I'm all for it. Casual bikers around here are not exactly fun to deal with.
- Brian-Puccio 12y ago
  I think one of the issues is that lots of people play fast and loose with the rules when moving about ... whether it be walking, bicycling or driving. And it's so easy to say "well I use this mode and I notice the people who use THAT mode are constantly breaking the rules and that's not safe!". If there's a demand to enforce the rules more stringently in the name of safety, would those doing the demanding also want to see citations for jaywalking?
  - ecopoesis 12y ago
    I for one would love to see more enforcement of jaywalking. I drive through the intersection of Cambridge and First in Cambridge, MA by Lechmere almost every day, and the jaywalkers who ignore their lights to run for the trolley cause far more traffic problems and almost accidents and then cars or bikes.
    - judk 12y ago
      Sounds like we need longer light phases to keep cars out of the way of trolley riders. People first.
uptown 12y ago
The stats presented by the article are very myopic. Bikes are mobile objects that frequently travel between areas covered by multiple precincts. Rather than looking solely at the 5th precinct, they arguably should have presented a wider view of the city's records on bicycle activity. When you do that, it paints a very different picture of some of the statistics. For instance - "cyclist accidents that caused deaths" : 2013: 0, 2014: 0 Jill Tarlov was killed by a biker in September: http://gothamist.com/2014/09/22/jill_tarlov_central_park.php http://gothamist.com/2014/09/22/jill_tarlov_central_park.php Irving Schachter was killed by a biker in August: http://gothamist.com/2014/08/14/cyclist_kills_jogger.php http://gothamist.com/2014/08/14/cyclist_kills_jogger.php
- lfuller 12y ago
  That's not relevant to the discussion. This article was disputing a claim that "the 5th Pct. had a 115% increase in bicycle collisions this year", not that NYC in general had an increase.
  - uptown 12y ago
    Understood. But the premise of the article asks if the 5th Precinct plans to "start ticketing more cyclists". The tweet didn't say that. It said they'll be enforcing violations, which is what you expect police officers to do with laws that are on the books. You're right - maybe the stats are bad, and the post is right to ask for clarification. But the post assumes the tweet means they'll change their enforcement tactics, and I don't read that in this tweet.
- oh_sigh 12y ago
  You should be directing your criticism at the NYPD, which is the group that put forward the claim that there was a 115% increase in bicycle accidents in the 5th precinct.
arikrak 12y ago
Whatever the official collisions stats, I often see reckless bikers in NYC, so there should be some enforcement. E.g. bikers who zip by the wrong way against a red light and almost hit a few pedestrians.
baldeagle 12y ago
This is what gives me hope about our government; that as much as algorithms will provide a troubling future (due to reduced emphasis on false positives in seeking to minimize false negatives) there will be a way to check the work of public pronouncements and perhaps affect change for the better.
Spooky23 12y ago
I think that Twitter post was flawed, probably due to poor scoping and the conclusions reached by iquantny were not very meaningful due that that poor scoping and incomplete data. There are lots of flaws in the NYPD's approach to investigating traffic incidents: 10 cyclists were killed in 2013, 17 in 2012. In 2013 there were 4,000+ cyclist injuries citywide. ( http://www.streetsblog.org/2014/01/31/nypd-16059-pedestrians-and-cyclists-injured-178-killed-in-traffic-in-2013// http://www.streetsblog.org/2014/01/31/nypd-16059-pedestrians... ) The other issue is that that the NYPD does a very poor job investigating traffic incidents... There are 19 investigators citywide (with a 40,000 member police force) and patrol officers routinely screw up the recording of data. ( http://www.streetsblog.org/2012/02/15/nypds-lax-crash-investigations-may-violate-state-law/ http://www.streetsblog.org/2012/02/15/nypds-lax-crash-invest... ) Understanding the process in filling out reports and understanding what the data means is critical to analysis. The type of data in this dataset and the quality of the data make it difficult to draw conclusions. In a big city like NYC minor stuff like bike accidents where someone doesn't die, the police either won't get called or won't flush 20 minutes down the toilet filling out reports.
vinceguidry 12y ago
More obvious rationale is that NYPD just made up the 115% number and is deciding to change the policy for political reasons.
shittyanalogy 12y ago
I never really understood the value in ticketing cyclists, or jay walkers for that matter in NYC. Very few people are getting hurt, even in the densest metropolitan area in the country so why are we so worried about it? Because cyclists can be annoying sometimes? Also the city speed limit went down to 25 mph. Isn't this supposed to take care of many of the collisions? Those of us that are safe cyclists but run red lights are going to be discouraged from riding as it just takes too damn long to cycle around smoggy, loud NYC stopping at every goddamn light. But those of us that are aggressive ass-hole riders are just going to be more likely to unsafely try to evade the police. Which is not hard if you know what you're doing. It doesn't appear to be about safety, as the statistics clearly indicate that it's currently safe. It appears to be about making money and possibly discourage cycling.
- Arainach 12y ago
  > Those of us that are safe cyclists but run red lights Speaking as someone who bikes/takes transit everywhere (in Seattle, not NYC), what an oxymoron. I'm not saying that at every single stop sign you have to come to a complete, foot-on-the-ground stop, but running lights is ridiculous and will do nothing but increase the hatred for all cyclists held by drivers by antagonizing them. Every OTHER form of transportation seems to do just fine "stopping at every goddamn light". Get off your high horse - even if a bicycle running a light isn't the same threat to public safety as a multi-ton steel death machine doing so, claiming that you can do so and be a "safe cyclist" will do nothing but hurt your credibility.
  - schrodinger 12y ago
    Eh, I'm a cyclist in NYC and when i come to a red light i slow way down and if there are any pedestrians or cars, I stop. But if it's completely clear, I'll roll through slowly and carefully. It feels pretty safe and I make sure that I always come to complete stops far back if there are pedestrians because they have the right away. I've heard that some states legally treat red lights and stop signs as yield signs for bicyclists, and I think that's reasonable. I view what I do as the same as jay walking... Technically illegal, but no one is going to stand and wait at a cross walk for 30 seconds for a light to change when it's clear there's no one coming.
madaxe_again 12y ago
There are lies, damned lies, and... you know the rest. It's not necessarily a mathematical error. You can make any set of stats show pretty much anything you want. From that same data, one could conclude that collisions on bicycles only ever occur on intersections, and therefore we need to invest more in underpasses, which are completely safe, as this data shows no collisions in underpasses. Underpasses save lives. Magic, eh?
jasonjei 12y ago
As a motorcyclist, I think cyclists should be held to the same rules of the law as other vehicles to make driving predictable and safe. As it stands right now, I have to assume cyclists (via heuristics/profiling) as a wildcard--will they run a red light? Will they weave in and out of traffic unsafely (this is an acceptable practice, when done with ample buffer given their size and speed)? I think cycling is great (I'm also a cyclist as well). But the fact they don't carry a vehicle registration shouldn't exempt them the rules of the public road to make them predictable users (and unpredictable users, such as those erratically lane splitting, jaywalking, reckless driving, under the influence, speeding, etc, should be penalized to encourage predictable use).
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  >> "As it stands right now, I have to assume cyclists (via heuristics/profiling) as a wildcard--will they run a red light?" I feel the same as a pedestrian. I can't count the number of times I've had to jump out of the way of a cyclist running a red light. Predictability is important for everyone on the road so following the same rules as other vehicles on the road makes sense.
  - jrockway 12y ago
    As a cyclist, I can't count the number of times I've had to slam on the brakes to avoid a pedestrian jaywalking without even looking for traffic. Here's the reality in NYC. Pedestrians ignore traffic laws. Cyclists ignore traffic laws. Cars ignore traffic laws. Everyone does whatever they want 24/7, and focusing on one group isn't going to fix the problem. The problem might even be unfixable.
- mikeash 12y ago
  Around here (DC area) I have to assume that about drivers too. I've seen drivers blow through red lights, turn right on red from the center lane while pedestrians are trying to cross the street, even drive the wrong way down one-way roads, or on the wrong side of a divided road. Drivers fail to use their turn signals more often than not. Crossing the street in front of a car is a crapshoot, as people will often look left and then proceed without looking straight again. Bicyclists can be a nuisance, but drivers are a menace. I know where I'd like to see enforcement concentrated, and it's not on the bicyclists.
jff 12y ago
I wish all police everywhere started ticketing for more traffic violations. When everyone on the road--cyclist, motorist, and pedestrian--follows the rules precisely, traffic is predictable and safe. When morons wave you through at a 4-way stop, or turn without signaling (yay California), or blow red lights on their bicycle, you have to go into extra-defensive mode because the road is no longer predictable.
- PaulHoule 12y ago
  It astonishes me how much (many) cyclists blame everybody else for the dangers they are exposed to. For instance, you even see bicycle cops riding their bikes on the wrong side of the street. If they're chasing a suspect or heading to a crime scene I'll forgive it, but they usually aren't in a hurry and are actually ignorant of the law they are supposed to enforce. As a pedestrian I have been hit multiple times by cyclists on a sidewalk and in fact when I was in high school I knocked a pedestrian down pretty hard when I was rolling down a steep hill.
  - ceejayoz 12y ago
    > For instance, you even see bicycle cops riding their bikes on the wrong side of the street. You know, this one I understand entirely. When I walk on a road without sidewalks, I always walk on the wrong side of the road, so I can see what's coming and whether they're paying attention. Getting mowed down from behind by someone not looking where they're going isn't on my bucket list.
    - jff 12y ago
      And that's correct--WHEN WALKING. Cyclists are supposed to behave as vehicles, not as pedestrians, so they need to move with traffic.
      - ceejayoz 12y ago
        I'm just saying part of the problem is that cyclists behave as a squishy bag of meat in an accident. Given the prevalence of inattentive motorists, I'm not shocked some folks prefer to risk a ticket.
amsheehan 12y ago
Any laws being enforced to inconvenience NYC bicyclists is fine by me.
hotgoldminer 12y ago
Revenues, revenues, revenues. More like bike ridership is up 115%. Selectively enforcing strikes this reader as arbitrary at best.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
kazinator 12y ago
What are the consequences of not paying a bicycle ticket in MY, if you don't have a driver's license? Anyway, the cops should be focused on those who are in tenuous control of two tons of steel, going three times the speed of a bicycle.
shittyanalogy 12y ago
I'm going to attempt to rationalize why cyclists don't obey traffic laws in cities. The short answer is that bicycle riding in cities sucks. It's loud, slippery, uneven, blocked, takes a lot of physical effort, is full of unpredictable giant metal things that can kill you, teeming with large moving meat pillars that will jump in front of you at any moment, you're completely exposed to the weather and can't safely look at a map while you navigate. They've created a few strips of pot-hole ridden, double parked green pavement that they say is just for you but it's not safe even if you're being safe and extremely uncomfortable. Bicycle riding also happens though to be the fastest, most liberating way to get around and is good exercise so you put up with it, but you put up with it while annoying a few people yourself. You block lanes when you feel like it's safer to do so, cross red lights when you think it's safe so you save some time and so you can stay in front of the same wave of traffic as they already know you're there. Some times you make a bad decision that results in a honk but you've also been splashed, cut-off, bumped, blocked and almost doored and you don't have a horn of your own for when that happens. You're up against a torment of danger and uncomfortable that can kill you and the most you can ever do is make someone annoyed or maybe flip a mirror back. You start to realize that the cards aren't in your favor and that annoying drivers in their crash cages, with AC, maps, surround sound, horns, gas pedals and bucket seats really isn't that big of a deal. You just don't equate your presence on the road with theirs and don't think the same laws should apply. Not because you're magically above the law but because through years of experience you can see that the situations are completely different and require completely different attention. You think to yourself, the day cars weight 40lbs and go 15mph is the day you obey all the same laws as them.
- lavamantis 12y ago
  Thanks for articulating this, although you may have just started a religious war. My only addition is why cyclists don't completely stop at stop signs. It's a LOT of work to get up to speed from a dead stop, so it seems a bit pointless to do it when you can clearly see that no one is in the intersection. Also, as you are trying to accelerate from a dead stop, it takes a while to get through the intersection. If there does happen to be a motorist there, they have to sit and wait while you (slowly) go by. It isn't necessarily legal, but cyclists not completely stopping probably helps everyone.
hotgoldminer 12y ago
Why enforcing some laws is impractical: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ Bike Lanes by Casey Neistat.
noer 12y ago
A great time to play "bicycles in the media" comment bingo: http://i.imgur.com/UUafNzZ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/UUafNzZ.jpg

162 points by vermontdevil 12y ago

gohrt 12y ago

It's not a mathematical error when the number is completely fabricated to justify a policy change. That's just lying.

thenmar 12y ago
It's not really a policy change though is it? Aren't they enforcing laws that cyclists previously were breaking with impunity? I would like them to show their work too, but I don't really see the policy conspiracy angle to this.
- dead10ck 12y ago
  Exactly. No policies are changing. They're just putting more resources into enforcing existing laws.
  - lil_cain 12y ago
    That is a policy change. Policy and law are not the same thing.
  - thrownaway2424 12y ago
    They're rearranging the same resources from enforcing something else to enforcing traffic laws against bicyclists.
    - seanp2k2 12y ago
      Because obviously, this is NYC's biggest problem. I can see the headlines now: "Cyclist Moving Violation Crime Wave Hits as Snowfall Begins, but NYPD Strikes Back"
- hoopism 12y ago
  It's not like police are an inexhaustible resource. Resources allocated in one realm means a dip in another. Using bad stats to justify a reallocation should be alarming to local residents.
  - thenmar 12y ago
    Are they actually allocating resources for this? I read it as the police would no longer be giving people a free pass where they used to
- iquantny 12y ago
  Policy is not the same as law. A police department can have a policy on how to distribute resources....
- mikegillman 12y ago
  So why bother to fabricate reasoning behind their actions?
- seanp2k2 12y ago
  Not sure about NY laws, but other states allow "Idaho stops" (treating stop signs as yields on bikes): http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/more-idaho-stop-and-why-cyclists-should-be-able-roll-through-stop-signs.html http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/more-idaho-stop-and-why-cycl... If you've ever commuted via bike, you probably understand how little sense it makes to stop at every sign and roll no lights.
- wanderingstan 12y ago
  Most auto drivers, myself included, regularly (and with impunity) break the law against driving over the speed limit. If police announced they intend to start ticketing people for even 1-9mpg speeding violations, we would all agree this was a massive "policy change." (Note that I'm not saying that these law breaking activities are equivalent; only that there are a multitude of laws that are not enforced, and a change in enforcement is indeed a policy change.)

coldcode 12y ago

Big data does not mean big lies. If you make policy based on analyzing data you should be required to show your work.

tedunangst 12y ago
Obvious solution: they start (continue) making policy without analyzing the data.

dead10ck 12y ago

Even if the numbers are completely made up, I'm not going to be outraged that police decided to enforce laws that cyclists need to be abiding by anyway.

thrownaway2424 12y ago
It's about the opportunity cost. What other thing could the police be doing instead of giving traffic tickets to cyclists? After all, the best case outcome of doing so is to reduce pedestrian injuries from 1 per year to 0 per year, which isn't much of a benefit. 16000 people were injured and 178 killed by cars in NYC in 2013. That's a much richer hunting ground for police activity.
- tedunangst 12y ago
  "Stop turning a blind eye" doesn't require that many new resources to enforce. The only opportunity cost is the time it takes the officer to write the ticket, which isn't much.
  - thrownaway2424 12y ago
    NYPD says they don't even have the resources to investigate fatal car crashes. They didn't bother investigating the death of a three year old girl in a crosswalk this year. The driver didn't even get so much as a ticket. If there's some cop standing around with nothing to do I'm sure they could be assigned to look into the fifty pedestrian injury collisions that happen every day in New York.
    - avn2109 12y ago
      >> "If there's some cop standing around with nothing to do..." Honestly, I have (almost) only ever seen NYPD officers standing around with nothing to do. I don't know if that's because they are drastically overmanned or because they intentionally deploy loafing cops for the deterrent effect.

hoopism 12y ago

Doesn't appear to be any flawed math here... just flawed PR. Not like somebody missed a decimal point. Based on my comprehensive understanding (watched The Wire and read articles), made up stats and policing are old buddies.

peapicker 12y ago

Could also be that they are only looking at the subset of collisions involving bicycles where the cyclist was determined to be at fault, which isn't data available in the analysis given here.

Disruptive_Dave 12y ago

They actually started towards the end of the summer, at least here in Brooklyn. Hadn't seen a biker get pulled over for things like not coming to a complete halt at stops signs in 3 years I've been here. Witnessed about 5 of them in the span of 3 weeks, heard about plenty more. I'm all for it. Casual bikers around here are not exactly fun to deal with.

Brian-Puccio 12y ago
I think one of the issues is that lots of people play fast and loose with the rules when moving about ... whether it be walking, bicycling or driving. And it's so easy to say "well I use this mode and I notice the people who use THAT mode are constantly breaking the rules and that's not safe!". If there's a demand to enforce the rules more stringently in the name of safety, would those doing the demanding also want to see citations for jaywalking?
- ecopoesis 12y ago
  I for one would love to see more enforcement of jaywalking. I drive through the intersection of Cambridge and First in Cambridge, MA by Lechmere almost every day, and the jaywalkers who ignore their lights to run for the trolley cause far more traffic problems and almost accidents and then cars or bikes.
  - judk 12y ago
    Sounds like we need longer light phases to keep cars out of the way of trolley riders. People first.

uptown 12y ago

The stats presented by the article are very myopic. Bikes are mobile objects that frequently travel between areas covered by multiple precincts. Rather than looking solely at the 5th precinct, they arguably should have presented a wider view of the city's records on bicycle activity. When you do that, it paints a very different picture of some of the statistics. For instance - "cyclist accidents that caused deaths" : 2013: 0, 2014: 0 Jill Tarlov was killed by a biker in September: http://gothamist.com/2014/09/22/jill_tarlov_central_park.php http://gothamist.com/2014/09/22/jill_tarlov_central_park.php Irving Schachter was killed by a biker in August: http://gothamist.com/2014/08/14/cyclist_kills_jogger.php http://gothamist.com/2014/08/14/cyclist_kills_jogger.php

lfuller 12y ago
That's not relevant to the discussion. This article was disputing a claim that "the 5th Pct. had a 115% increase in bicycle collisions this year", not that NYC in general had an increase.
- uptown 12y ago
  Understood. But the premise of the article asks if the 5th Precinct plans to "start ticketing more cyclists". The tweet didn't say that. It said they'll be enforcing violations, which is what you expect police officers to do with laws that are on the books. You're right - maybe the stats are bad, and the post is right to ask for clarification. But the post assumes the tweet means they'll change their enforcement tactics, and I don't read that in this tweet.
oh_sigh 12y ago
You should be directing your criticism at the NYPD, which is the group that put forward the claim that there was a 115% increase in bicycle accidents in the 5th precinct.

arikrak 12y ago

Whatever the official collisions stats, I often see reckless bikers in NYC, so there should be some enforcement. E.g. bikers who zip by the wrong way against a red light and almost hit a few pedestrians.

baldeagle 12y ago

This is what gives me hope about our government; that as much as algorithms will provide a troubling future (due to reduced emphasis on false positives in seeking to minimize false negatives) there will be a way to check the work of public pronouncements and perhaps affect change for the better.

Spooky23 12y ago

I think that Twitter post was flawed, probably due to poor scoping and the conclusions reached by iquantny were not very meaningful due that that poor scoping and incomplete data. There are lots of flaws in the NYPD's approach to investigating traffic incidents: 10 cyclists were killed in 2013, 17 in 2012. In 2013 there were 4,000+ cyclist injuries citywide. ( http://www.streetsblog.org/2014/01/31/nypd-16059-pedestrians-and-cyclists-injured-178-killed-in-traffic-in-2013// http://www.streetsblog.org/2014/01/31/nypd-16059-pedestrians... ) The other issue is that that the NYPD does a very poor job investigating traffic incidents... There are 19 investigators citywide (with a 40,000 member police force) and patrol officers routinely screw up the recording of data. ( http://www.streetsblog.org/2012/02/15/nypds-lax-crash-investigations-may-violate-state-law/ http://www.streetsblog.org/2012/02/15/nypds-lax-crash-invest... ) Understanding the process in filling out reports and understanding what the data means is critical to analysis. The type of data in this dataset and the quality of the data make it difficult to draw conclusions. In a big city like NYC minor stuff like bike accidents where someone doesn't die, the police either won't get called or won't flush 20 minutes down the toilet filling out reports.

vinceguidry 12y ago

More obvious rationale is that NYPD just made up the 115% number and is deciding to change the policy for political reasons.

shittyanalogy 12y ago

I never really understood the value in ticketing cyclists, or jay walkers for that matter in NYC. Very few people are getting hurt, even in the densest metropolitan area in the country so why are we so worried about it? Because cyclists can be annoying sometimes? Also the city speed limit went down to 25 mph. Isn't this supposed to take care of many of the collisions? Those of us that are safe cyclists but run red lights are going to be discouraged from riding as it just takes too damn long to cycle around smoggy, loud NYC stopping at every goddamn light. But those of us that are aggressive ass-hole riders are just going to be more likely to unsafely try to evade the police. Which is not hard if you know what you're doing. It doesn't appear to be about safety, as the statistics clearly indicate that it's currently safe. It appears to be about making money and possibly discourage cycling.

Arainach 12y ago
> Those of us that are safe cyclists but run red lights Speaking as someone who bikes/takes transit everywhere (in Seattle, not NYC), what an oxymoron. I'm not saying that at every single stop sign you have to come to a complete, foot-on-the-ground stop, but running lights is ridiculous and will do nothing but increase the hatred for all cyclists held by drivers by antagonizing them. Every OTHER form of transportation seems to do just fine "stopping at every goddamn light". Get off your high horse - even if a bicycle running a light isn't the same threat to public safety as a multi-ton steel death machine doing so, claiming that you can do so and be a "safe cyclist" will do nothing but hurt your credibility.
- schrodinger 12y ago
  Eh, I'm a cyclist in NYC and when i come to a red light i slow way down and if there are any pedestrians or cars, I stop. But if it's completely clear, I'll roll through slowly and carefully. It feels pretty safe and I make sure that I always come to complete stops far back if there are pedestrians because they have the right away. I've heard that some states legally treat red lights and stop signs as yield signs for bicyclists, and I think that's reasonable. I view what I do as the same as jay walking... Technically illegal, but no one is going to stand and wait at a cross walk for 30 seconds for a light to change when it's clear there's no one coming.

madaxe_again 12y ago

There are lies, damned lies, and... you know the rest. It's not necessarily a mathematical error. You can make any set of stats show pretty much anything you want. From that same data, one could conclude that collisions on bicycles only ever occur on intersections, and therefore we need to invest more in underpasses, which are completely safe, as this data shows no collisions in underpasses. Underpasses save lives. Magic, eh?

jasonjei 12y ago

As a motorcyclist, I think cyclists should be held to the same rules of the law as other vehicles to make driving predictable and safe. As it stands right now, I have to assume cyclists (via heuristics/profiling) as a wildcard--will they run a red light? Will they weave in and out of traffic unsafely (this is an acceptable practice, when done with ample buffer given their size and speed)? I think cycling is great (I'm also a cyclist as well). But the fact they don't carry a vehicle registration shouldn't exempt them the rules of the public road to make them predictable users (and unpredictable users, such as those erratically lane splitting, jaywalking, reckless driving, under the influence, speeding, etc, should be penalized to encourage predictable use).

k-mcgrady 12y ago
>> "As it stands right now, I have to assume cyclists (via heuristics/profiling) as a wildcard--will they run a red light?" I feel the same as a pedestrian. I can't count the number of times I've had to jump out of the way of a cyclist running a red light. Predictability is important for everyone on the road so following the same rules as other vehicles on the road makes sense.
- jrockway 12y ago
  As a cyclist, I can't count the number of times I've had to slam on the brakes to avoid a pedestrian jaywalking without even looking for traffic. Here's the reality in NYC. Pedestrians ignore traffic laws. Cyclists ignore traffic laws. Cars ignore traffic laws. Everyone does whatever they want 24/7, and focusing on one group isn't going to fix the problem. The problem might even be unfixable.
mikeash 12y ago
Around here (DC area) I have to assume that about drivers too. I've seen drivers blow through red lights, turn right on red from the center lane while pedestrians are trying to cross the street, even drive the wrong way down one-way roads, or on the wrong side of a divided road. Drivers fail to use their turn signals more often than not. Crossing the street in front of a car is a crapshoot, as people will often look left and then proceed without looking straight again. Bicyclists can be a nuisance, but drivers are a menace. I know where I'd like to see enforcement concentrated, and it's not on the bicyclists.

jff 12y ago

I wish all police everywhere started ticketing for more traffic violations. When everyone on the road--cyclist, motorist, and pedestrian--follows the rules precisely, traffic is predictable and safe. When morons wave you through at a 4-way stop, or turn without signaling (yay California), or blow red lights on their bicycle, you have to go into extra-defensive mode because the road is no longer predictable.

PaulHoule 12y ago
It astonishes me how much (many) cyclists blame everybody else for the dangers they are exposed to. For instance, you even see bicycle cops riding their bikes on the wrong side of the street. If they're chasing a suspect or heading to a crime scene I'll forgive it, but they usually aren't in a hurry and are actually ignorant of the law they are supposed to enforce. As a pedestrian I have been hit multiple times by cyclists on a sidewalk and in fact when I was in high school I knocked a pedestrian down pretty hard when I was rolling down a steep hill.
- ceejayoz 12y ago
  > For instance, you even see bicycle cops riding their bikes on the wrong side of the street. You know, this one I understand entirely. When I walk on a road without sidewalks, I always walk on the wrong side of the road, so I can see what's coming and whether they're paying attention. Getting mowed down from behind by someone not looking where they're going isn't on my bucket list.
  - jff 12y ago
    And that's correct--WHEN WALKING. Cyclists are supposed to behave as vehicles, not as pedestrians, so they need to move with traffic.
    - ceejayoz 12y ago
      I'm just saying part of the problem is that cyclists behave as a squishy bag of meat in an accident. Given the prevalence of inattentive motorists, I'm not shocked some folks prefer to risk a ticket.

amsheehan 12y ago

Any laws being enforced to inconvenience NYC bicyclists is fine by me.

hotgoldminer 12y ago

Revenues, revenues, revenues. More like bike ridership is up 115%. Selectively enforcing strikes this reader as arbitrary at best.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

kazinator 12y ago

What are the consequences of not paying a bicycle ticket in MY, if you don't have a driver's license? Anyway, the cops should be focused on those who are in tenuous control of two tons of steel, going three times the speed of a bicycle.

shittyanalogy 12y ago

I'm going to attempt to rationalize why cyclists don't obey traffic laws in cities. The short answer is that bicycle riding in cities sucks. It's loud, slippery, uneven, blocked, takes a lot of physical effort, is full of unpredictable giant metal things that can kill you, teeming with large moving meat pillars that will jump in front of you at any moment, you're completely exposed to the weather and can't safely look at a map while you navigate. They've created a few strips of pot-hole ridden, double parked green pavement that they say is just for you but it's not safe even if you're being safe and extremely uncomfortable. Bicycle riding also happens though to be the fastest, most liberating way to get around and is good exercise so you put up with it, but you put up with it while annoying a few people yourself. You block lanes when you feel like it's safer to do so, cross red lights when you think it's safe so you save some time and so you can stay in front of the same wave of traffic as they already know you're there. Some times you make a bad decision that results in a honk but you've also been splashed, cut-off, bumped, blocked and almost doored and you don't have a horn of your own for when that happens. You're up against a torment of danger and uncomfortable that can kill you and the most you can ever do is make someone annoyed or maybe flip a mirror back. You start to realize that the cards aren't in your favor and that annoying drivers in their crash cages, with AC, maps, surround sound, horns, gas pedals and bucket seats really isn't that big of a deal. You just don't equate your presence on the road with theirs and don't think the same laws should apply. Not because you're magically above the law but because through years of experience you can see that the situations are completely different and require completely different attention. You think to yourself, the day cars weight 40lbs and go 15mph is the day you obey all the same laws as them.

lavamantis 12y ago
Thanks for articulating this, although you may have just started a religious war. My only addition is why cyclists don't completely stop at stop signs. It's a LOT of work to get up to speed from a dead stop, so it seems a bit pointless to do it when you can clearly see that no one is in the intersection. Also, as you are trying to accelerate from a dead stop, it takes a while to get through the intersection. If there does happen to be a motorist there, they have to sit and wait while you (slowly) go by. It isn't necessarily legal, but cyclists not completely stopping probably helps everyone.

hotgoldminer 12y ago

Why enforcing some laws is impractical: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ Bike Lanes by Casey Neistat.

noer 12y ago

A great time to play "bicycles in the media" comment bingo: http://i.imgur.com/UUafNzZ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/UUafNzZ.jpg