Paul Tay: Terror or Trendsetter?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I got mooned by Bike Fox on 31st a couple weeks ago.  Made me chuckle.

If we want to talk about THE LAW, there are minimum speed limits on expressways.  In general driving, you are required by law to keep a safe and proper speed (8 mph in a 40 would probably NOT be safe).  All vehicles on public roads are required to use signals (including brake), most bikers don't even know the simple signals let alone use them.  Bikes would not be able to cut through parking lots, run red lights, usurp traffic jams by riding on the shoulder/up the middle and so on.  You are not allowed to drive in a turning lane (as you are fond of doing on Harvard from time to time, which I think is hilarious even though it slows me down you goofy bastage).  

You are arguing that bicycles should get all the advantages of a car at the expense of cars, but not have to follow ALL the same rules.  

None of the bike supporters have really explained to me why it is necessary to ride down the main streets.  I biked to law school, to my jobs downtown, to the bar building and all over midtown and 99% of the time I was able to ride through neighborhoods.  It made a nicer and safer ride for me, and didn't mess with anyone else.  I guess the crux of my argument is that the only reason to insist on riding down Harvard at 5:30pm at 8pmh is because you can, and every one else be damned.  

If my boy and I can use bikes as basic transportation without necessarily hindering the rest of the world, so can you.

Also, Paul, you really aren't supposed to have more than 1 users name...

Looking at the link to the photos of Biker Fox, he appears obsessed with his own donkey.  Might be why he's never been married. []

[Ed W]

Cyclists are safer riding on the street than an adjacent sidewalk.  The risk of collision is about three times greater on a sidewalk because every doorway and driveway is an intersection, and as we all know, intersections are where most collisions occur.  

And as for cyclists running stop signs and red lights, I once sat at a local 4 way stop and counted vehicles that came to a complete stop, i.e. the wheels stopped turning.  The vast majority of motor vehicles (80% if I recall right) did not stop, and those that did had to do so because of cross traffic in the intersection.  So, insisting that you'll respect a bicyclists right to use the public roads only after they obey all traffic laws is a specious argument, but then we already knew that.

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder
[br
None of the bike supporters have really explained to me why it is necessary to ride down the main streets.  

If my boy and I can use bikes as basic transportation without necessarily hindering the rest of the world, so can you.

CF, when a bicyclist uses his machine for basic transportation, like riding to work or the grocery store, he has the same concerns as any motorist - mainly getting to his destination as quickly and directly as possible.  Arterial streets are ideal for this because unlike neighborhood streets, they're wider and have fewer intersections.  It's far easier for a motorist to pass a cyclist on a 4 lane street than on a 2 lane.  Honestly, this is not BS or lycra induced hyperbole.  It an observable truth.

I've been writing that cyclists should ride in a normal lane with about one third of it to their right and two thirds to their left.  Most lanes here in Oklahoma are no wider than 12 feet, so this puts his tire track about 4 feet from the road edge, exclusive of the gutter pan if provided.  Overtaking motorists are obliged to pass safely, and it's necessary that they slow down and wait until it's safe to pass.  There's nothing about arrogance or impeding traffic in this.  It's just safer for the cyclist and there's nothing in the law that obligates any road user to do something he knows is unsafe.  Safety ALWAYS trumps convenience.

As for "hindering the rest of the world" what can I say?  The public roads belong to all of us, regardless of our mode of transportation.  So while it may be a minor annoyance to have to slow down and wait to pass a cyclist, are any of us so important that a few seconds will make a critical difference in our lives?  I use both a bicycle and a car, and I've learned that there's no need to try to hurry in traffic.  It just adds stress to my day.  So when you come up behind a cyclist in traffic, just take a deep breath and wait for a break to go around him.  Hey, it could be me!

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

1) HWY 51/64 is a STATE highway, maintained with federal funds.  A municipal ordinance is not controlling.

Tell that to TPD and the JUDGE.  TPD normally uses City ordinances for traffic offenses on the portion of Broken Arrow Expressway within their jurisdiction.

City traffic charges are normally litigated in Tulsa Municipal.

quote:
2) My kids big wheel can not move at 35 mph, can he ride on the freeway?  What about a Segway? A horse?

Yes. Your kid on big wheel, the horse, and the Segway are all allowed to operate on the Broken Arrow Expressway.  

Definition of Traffic, 37 TRO 100: Traffic shall mean pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, vehicles, streetcars and other conveyances, either singly or together, while using any street or roadway for purposes of travel.

quote:
A bad ruling doesn't mean the law is worth while.  And every time you do it, you end up getting kicked off the road.  

By ordinance it is against the law to spit on the sidewalk in Tulsa, to swear in front of a woman, or to fail to observe the Sabath.  Yay.

Yes. If anyone disagrees with the trial judge, they certainly have the right of appeal.

quote:
3) You admit that the only reason you do it is to be a jerk to everyone else?  Awesome, thanks for that.  

There has never been any admission to that effect.  There was an admission to exercise the right of travel by bicycle to avoid losing the said right.

quote:
I have the right to call you racial slurs, to get in front of you and lock my brakes up (you are required to maintain distance, not I), I have the right to hit on your girlfriend/wife, I can call your child horrible things and/or teach him words he need not know... I have the right to do all sorts of things that one shouldn't do.  Merely having the right to do so does NOT mean you should exercise it.

If you don't exercise your Free Speech rights, you DESERVE to lose it.  You have to the right to call anyone any racial slur you wish.  They have the right to react accordingly and appropriately.  There is also a City ordinance criminalizing cussing, 27 TRO 1405.

You have the right to hit someone's gf/wife.  They have the right to call the cops and press assault and battery charges.

quote:
4) Your quote is wrong.  Give me a source for it, I couldn't find one so I call BS.

Which quote do you speak of?

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982

well if you can't go the proper speed, then why would one be allowed to travel on said road? Judges interpret the law wrong on many diff occasions.  Anyways, lets agree to disagree.  Keep spouting off terminology that is obviously outdated and out of reality.

From the totality of state statutes and city ordinances, both the Legislature and City Council clearly intended to allow bicyclists to be an integral component of TRAFFIC, and operate VEHICLES as DRIVERS.

All the ordinances and statutes cited are currently in FULL force and EFFECT.

If you have an issue of law, the appellate court would have jurisdiction, but, only if you perfect the appeal.  And, if you didn't timely make objections on issues of law in trial court, you can't bring it up in the Petition on Error.  

"Proper speed" is an issue of fact, determined in trial court.   The legal term is "normal and reasonable" speed.

What is "normal and reasonable" speed of traffic, if the definition of traffic includes, pedestrians, bicycles, motor vehicles?

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by 1099paralegal

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982

well if you can't go the proper speed, then why would one be allowed to travel on said road? Judges interpret the law wrong on many diff occasions.  Anyways, lets agree to disagree.  Keep spouting off terminology that is obviously outdated and out of reality.

From the totality of state statutes and city ordinances, both the Legislature and City Council clearly intended to allow bicyclists to be an integral component of TRAFFIC, and operate VEHICLES as DRIVERS.

All the ordinances and statutes cited are currently in FULL force and EFFECT.

If you have an issue of law, the appellate court would have jurisdiction, but, only if you perfect the appeal.  And, if you didn't timely make objections on issues of law in trial court, you can't bring it up in the Petition on Error.  

"Proper speed" is an issue of fact, determined in trial court.   The legal term is "normal and reasonable" speed.

What is "normal and reasonable" speed of traffic, if the definition of traffic includes, pedestrians, bicycles, motor vehicles?

please don't come on these boards preaching to the choir about law and how our judicial system works.  I am clearly aware how an appeal works in the court of law, as are many on these boards. (I intered with TPD for 2yrs, and my uncle is an attorney in the DA's office.  I also have my degree in criminology with a minor in business, among other things) I am somewhat familiar with the process.  

I dare you to find where these statues are in FULL FORCE as you say.  Once again, I challenge you to find the statistics of people being cited for the infractions that you have mentioned above.  They just aren't there.  Throw out all the city ordinances, statues, and sections of title 37 you want, plain and simple truth is that they aren't enforced.  Have you personally ever witnessed a police officer ticketing a bicyclist for riding in a business district? Have you ever seen a single ticket being issued to a person driving a car who is following too closely or not yielding to someone on a bike? I would bet not.  

on to the statistics.  Aaron Levenstein has a good thought on stats and I quote "Statistics are like bikinis.  What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital."
William Watt also had a great thought about stats "Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say."  Anyone can distort stats in their favor.  For example. An average of 16.5 cyclists per million die every year in the U.S. (For motorists, it's 19.9 motorists per million.) (National Safety Council)  Considering the number of cars on the streets vs bicycles, I will gladly take my chance in a car.

On a side note, found this along with the above stat "Most of the statistics for bike injuries are severly undercounted. In Texas for instance, the DPS only gets reports of crashes that involve motor vehicles and in which the motor vehicle sustains enough damage that it has to be towed. (Fatalities do get reported even if the motor vehicle isn't damaged.) "

My point is like I said above, stats an can be construed and contorted to fit anyone agenda.  Andrew Lang said it best "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts - for support rather than for illumination.

Have a safe and enjoyable Memorial Day Weekend.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982
I dare you to find where these statues are in FULL FORCE as you say.  Once again, I challenge you to find the statistics of people being cited for the infractions that you have mentioned above.  They just aren't there.  Throw out all the city ordinances, statues, and sections of title 37 you want, plain and simple truth is that they aren't enforced.  Have you personally ever witnessed a police officer ticketing a bicyclist for riding in a business district? Have you ever seen a single ticket being issued to a person driving a car who is following too closely or not yielding to someone on a bike? I would bet not.  

Statutes and ordinances are considered in FULL force and EFFECT, if they are published.  With all your experience, I am quite surprised you are not familiar with the term.

As for the wager, what's in YOUR wallet?  You are ON.  Meet me in Tulsa Municipal next week.  We can meetup with the clerks.  Then, we sort through the cases.

I accept cash, money order or PayPal.

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by 1099paralegal

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

1) HWY 51/64 is a STATE highway, maintained with federal funds.  A municipal ordinance is not controlling.

Tell that to TPD and the JUDGE.  TPD normally uses City ordinances for traffic offenses on the portion of Broken Arrow Expressway within their jurisdiction.

City traffic charges are normally litigated in Tulsa Municipal.

quote:
2) My kids big wheel can not move at 35 mph, can he ride on the freeway?  What about a Segway? A horse?

Yes. Your kid on big wheel, the horse, and the Segway are all allowed to operate on the Broken Arrow Expressway.  

Definition of Traffic, 37 TRO 100: Traffic shall mean pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, vehicles, streetcars and other conveyances, either singly or together, while using any street or roadway for purposes of travel.

quote:
A bad ruling doesn't mean the law is worth while.  And every time you do it, you end up getting kicked off the road.  

By ordinance it is against the law to spit on the sidewalk in Tulsa, to swear in front of a woman, or to fail to observe the Sabath.  Yay.

Yes. If anyone disagrees with the trial judge, they certainly have the right of appeal.

quote:
3) You admit that the only reason you do it is to be a jerk to everyone else?  Awesome, thanks for that.  

There has never been any admission to that effect.  There was an admission to exercise the right of travel by bicycle to avoid losing the said right.

quote:
I have the right to call you racial slurs, to get in front of you and lock my brakes up (you are required to maintain distance, not I), I have the right to hit on your girlfriend/wife, I can call your child horrible things and/or teach him words he need not know... I have the right to do all sorts of things that one shouldn't do.  Merely having the right to do so does NOT mean you should exercise it.

If you don't exercise your Free Speech rights, you DESERVE to lose it.  You have to the right to call anyone any racial slur you wish.  They have the right to react accordingly and appropriately.  There is also a City ordinance criminalizing cussing, 27 TRO 1405.

You have the right to hit someone's gf/wife.  They have the right to call the cops and press assault and battery charges.

quote:
4) Your quote is wrong.  Give me a source for it, I couldn't find one so I call BS.

Which quote do you speak of?

They said "HIT ON" not literally hit.  In Lehman's terms, FLIRT WITH.

As for the wager, you clearly did not understand my post either.  I asked "how many times have you seen someone pulled over for the infractions you had mentioned."  Once again, we can go pull cases if you like, which are mere stats once again and we have already gone over that topic.  I am sure the number of people cited compared to the daily drivers in Tulsa X the number of days per calendar year is going to equal a very very very small percentage.  Compare that to the people who are cited for speeding, no sealt belt use, illegal lane change, DUI, or any other traffic offense and you will agree that the petty bicycle laws are rarely enforced.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982


As for the wager, you clearly did not understand my post either.  I asked "how many times have you seen someone pulled over for the infractions you had mentioned."  Once again, we can go pull cases if you like, which are mere stats once again and we have already gone over that topic.  I am sure the number of people cited compared to the daily drivers in Tulsa X the number of days per calendar year is going to equal a very very very small percentage.  Compare that to the people who are cited for speeding, no sealt belt use, illegal lane change, DUI, or any other traffic offense and you will agree that the petty bicycle laws are rarely enforced.

One would hope that cyclists get fewer traffic citations than motorists. There are few of them regularly riding upon the streets. One expects that if only a few hundred cars at most were driven around Tulsa, there wouldn't be many citations issued to motorists, either.

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

Originally posted by TUalum0982


One would hope that cyclists get fewer traffic citations than motorists. There are few of them regularly riding upon the streets. One expects that if only a few hundred cars at most were driven around Tulsa, there wouldn't be many citations issued to motorists, either.

I have to agree that cyclists rarely get ticketed for their most common offense - running red lights and stop signs.  But there are some LEOs who are woefully ignorant of the laws pertaining to bicycle operation, and in some instances, those officers have tried to enforce non-existent laws or their own prejudices, effectively using their authority in an attempt to get a cyclist off the road.  In most cases, the advocacy group has made some headway in educating those officers (with one glaring exception).  Yet if police officers are not up to date on bicycling law and are unaware of the safe, practical application of those laws, why should we expect that the general public will be any better?

One quick word about the Tulsa Tough, though this should probably be a topic for another thread - I've been told that local, county, and state police agencies will be on the Tulsa Tough tour routes next weekend.  THEY WILL BE ENFORCING TRAFFIC LAW AND CYCLISTS SHOULD EXPECT TO ENCOUNTER THEM.  There were complaints last year about cyclist blowing stop signs and red lights en mass.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by Ed W
One quick word about the Tulsa Tough, though this should probably be a topic for another thread - I've been told that local, county, and state police agencies will be on the Tulsa Tough tour routes next weekend.  THEY WILL BE ENFORCING TRAFFIC LAW AND CYCLISTS SHOULD EXPECT TO ENCOUNTER THEM.  There were complaints last year about cyclist blowing stop signs and red lights en mass.

Oh boy.  THIS should be FUN!  EVERY ticket should be CHALLENGED.  

Show me a drunken, RECKLESS outta control bicyclist, I'll show you a village IDIOT impersonating Santa at the Annual TPD Awards Banquet.

Show me a drunken, RECKLESS, outta control motorist, I'll show you Kimberly Graham

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982

As for the wager, you clearly did not understand my post either.  I asked "how many times have you seen someone pulled over for the infractions you had mentioned."  Once again, we can go pull cases if you like, which are mere stats once again and we have already gone over that topic.  I am sure the number of people cited compared to the daily drivers in Tulsa X the number of days per calendar year is going to equal a very very very small percentage.  Compare that to the people who are cited for speeding, no sealt belt use, illegal lane change, DUI, or any other traffic offense and you will agree that the petty bicycle laws are rarely enforced.

Your point is totally MOOT.  There are simply more motor vehicle drivers than bicycle drivers.  So, therefore, there will be more citations for motorists running reds, speeding, etc.  

But, if an ordinance or statute is in FULL force and EFFECT, the opportunity exists to enforce them.

And, with all your law enforcement experience, I am QUITE surprise of your attitude toward the LAW.  If the law is on the books, it is intended to be OBEYED, even if it means someone has to sit in the back of the bus.

[shadows]

They say it has been removed but a sign once beside where you paid the traffic ticket read, [h3]IF YOU MUST DRIVE THE SPEED LIMIT DRIVE TO THE EXTREEM RIGHT[H3].  I understand that this sign has now been removed.

The Chinese, I understand are selling used scooters and bicycles at greatly reduced prices since they are changing their mode of transportation (man powered) to the elite gas guzzlers ( we once could afford to operate until we decided we needed the mid-east oil now moving gasoline toward predicted $6,00 a gallon) .  With the devaluated dollar (it is taboo to use run-away inflated dollar) they are forcing us to change our traffic rules, as they are bidding for our much needed  oil, paying  with the decreasing value of the dollar (which they have a passel of) in exchange for the value increasing EURO.

As many are aware the bicycle racks that once were available at the junior high and  high schools have been replaced by parking lots.  Soon it will be time to reissue of the next free money to stall for a short time of having to accept bicycles as a mode of transportation.  

Then of course as we max out the plastic cards (reach our limit on the credit cards) we may need less streets with slower drivers giving more room for bicycles again.  

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by shadows


Then of course as we max out the plastic cards (reach our limit on the credit cards) we may need less streets with slower drivers giving more room for bicycles again.  

In a snarky moment earlier today, I wondered about all those hulking, manly SUVs on area roads.  Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't they intended for rough, off-road driving?  The commercials show them driving to the tops of lonely desert peaks, presumably rolling over a few environmentalists and small animals along the way.  So by NOT improving area roads, our political leaders are permitting SUV owners to indulge in their adventure fantasies.

On a bicycle, even a bad road is passable if you're willing to snake around potholes and rough patches.  A nice, smooth surface benefits fast cyclists and those motorists who insist on driving passenger cars, but since I'm relatively slow, it's not a major concern.  

Could it be a conspiracy?

[shadows]

Like the rabbit in the wizard of oz saying "lets have a party" If one reads the ordinances of the city it is easy to see where some were written for a special party.

The statutes and AG opinions state ordinances passed with and emergency clause must specify what the emergency is.  If no emergency exist the voters has the right to petition against passage of an ordinance.  (This takes away a voters right to challenge the council action by petition.)

The city has many boards that form their own rules that should be submitted to the voters through the ordinance route.

Their answer has always been "this is the way we have always done it by declaring it has an emergency clause attached'.  So there are many special ordinances on the books of city hall.

Much of the bicycle usage is covered by ordinances. (They are listed by the city on internet.  

The parents of their son being given a ticket for riding his bicycle down 4th Place at Sheridan at 60 mph questioned whether radar read a large car instead of the boys bicycle.