Paul Tay: Terror or Trendsetter?

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Nick Danger

Here's another local *trendsetter*
http://www.bikerfox.com/foxphotos3/

If you talk to him, he'll give you a photo to keep in your wallet.

[Nick Danger]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

If you talk to him, he'll give you a photo to keep in your wallet.

Just what I always wanted...

I guess he thinks he's pretty hot stuff.

[Red Arrow]

The town where I grew up required all bicycles and riders to be licensed.  There was a modest fee for the annual driver test and metal tag for the bicycle. It was primarily aimed at keeping the young kids safe but adults were not exempted.

I am surprised Tulsa/Oklahoma has missed this opportunity for revenue.  The money could be dedicated for bicycle lanes and trails, just like our car tag fees are dedicated to roads.  []

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by 1099paralegal

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I understand bikes have a right to be on the roads, but if you can not go 40 MPH and hold up traffic... then why ride on those roads?  Instead of taking Harvard, why not ride up Pittsburgh?  Again, I understand you have the right to hold up traffic, create a hazard, and put yourself at risk - but what is the advantage?

Bikes don't hold up traffic.  Bikes ARE traffic.  

Penalizing a bicycle properly operating in traffic because of speed is tantamount to banning bicycles.  Trotwood v. Selz, 139 Ohio App. 3d 947 (2nd. Dist.-2000).

Traffic DEFINED--O.S. § 47 1-177:
Pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, vehicles, and other conveyances either singly or together, while using any highway for purposes of travel.

quote:
Also, if there is a bike trail parallel to the road (riverside), RIDE ON THE TRAIL not in the road.

Bicyclists are DRIVERS of VEHICLES, that operate in TRAFFIC.  

O.S. § 47 11-1202:
Every person riding a bicycle or motorized scooter upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this title, except as to special regulations in this article and except to those provisions of this title which by their nature can have no application.

quote:
If you are biking on a freeway on the shoulder, don't be surprised when cars don't get over.  The shoulder is not for transportation, it is for emergencies.  At 10-15 MPH while traffic is moving 5 feet away at 60-65 mph I'd say the safety aspect is lacking.

Duty to exercise due care, O.S. § 47 11-504:
Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this chapter, every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian upon any roadway and shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway.

Basic speed rule, O.S. § 47 11-801
A. Any person driving a vehicle on a highway shall drive the same at a careful and prudent speed not greater than nor less than is reasonable and proper, having due regard to the traffic, surface and width of the highway and any other conditions then existing. No person shall drive any vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than will permit the driver to bring it to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead.

quote:
I'm happy to support bike friendly initiatives, but drivers rule the road - making bikes a pain in their donkey certainly won't help your cause.  If the city was serious about it, they would have included bike lanes in the downtown rebuild and future street projects (like Minneapolis).  

Sorry, but that's my 2 cents.

Your 2 cents ain't worth much.  But, your ignorance is not your fault.  Bicyclists are the only drivers of vehicles in Oklahoma not properly trained or licensed.  

Oklahoma should incorporate bicycle driver training into the regular driver ed curriculum.  

Another random thought:  43,000 Americans die EVERY year because of motor vehicle collisions.  Year-in, year-out, 2 die EVERY day in Oklahoma because of motor vehicles.  Law enforcement actions have been ineffective in lowering the numbers consistently.

If the silly Santa really had a DEATH wish, he should be driving a motor vehicle, NOT a bicycle.

I don't give a damn what the laws say, CF is right.  Please don't come on these boards popping off laws that are the books, but like alot of our laws, arent enforced.

You are the idiot if you think that bicyclists don't hold up traffic.  I can rest assured that you would agree that when a bicyclist is riding parallel with the traffic on a busy 2 lane road, for instance, 101st, 91st, or 81st that is slows down traffic.  Also, for the idiot cyclists who are too confused that the sidewalks on streets are there for a reason, please use them.  Especially on 71st between lewis and riverside.  Why ride down the middle of the slow lane? When cars are zooming by at 40mph + and the cyclist is going around 20, or so, they are impeding traffic.  Throw out all the laws you want, thats fine, but it is what it is.

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

The town where I grew up required all bicycles and riders to be licensed.  There was a modest fee for the annual driver test and metal tag for the bicycle. It was primarily aimed at keeping the young kids safe but adults were not exempted.

I am surprised Tulsa/Oklahoma has missed this opportunity for revenue.  The money could be dedicated for bicycle lanes and trails, just like our car tag fees are dedicated to roads.  []

There are some municipalities that still require bicycle tags, but most of them are college towns who use them as another means of depriving students of unnecessary cash.  Get caught without a $5 tag and you get to pay a $25 fine.

But most towns don't bother with them because they cost more to administer than they bring in.  

I've never heard of requiring a license for riders, though.  Where was this?

[Red Arrow]

Suburban Philadelphia, PA. There wasn't actually a certificate issued to the rider. The rider had to pass a short course set up with cones and painted lines each year to get the tag for the bicycle.  The police dept. went to the local schools on a few weekends each spring to make it easier to get the tag. Otherwise you had to go to the police station. I doubt the township actually made any money. The metal tags were numbered sequentially starting with "1". It was a big deal for the kids to get low numbers. I think one year I got a single digit tag number.  I know I got several in the teens and twenties.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982

I don't give a damn what the laws say, CF is right.  Please don't come on these boards popping off laws that are the books, but like alot of our laws, arent enforced.

Don't preach to the choir.  Tell it to the next cop flashing the lights in your rear view mirror.

Also, if you truly believe you, as the motorist, have the right-of-way over the bicyclist moving slower than you in front, you have TWO choices.  You can either slow down, signal the lane change, and pass.  OR, simply RUN over the bicycle driver.  PROBLEM solved.

In court, where the judge and jury are all motorists, IGNORANT of bicyclists rights, you will most likely be found INNOCENT.

In a roomful of sympathetic motorists, you would have a myriad of plausible defenses.  1) Bicyclist shouldn't have been in the road; 2) Bicyclist was too far away from the curb in violation of 37 TRO 1003; 3) Bicyclist impeding traffic.

Or simply testify, you didn't see the bicyclist.   The most common defense.  

Next time bicyclist(s) get YOUR way, BRING it.

quote:
You are the idiot if you think that bicyclists don't hold up traffic.  I can rest assured that you would agree that when a bicyclist is riding parallel with the traffic on a busy 2 lane road, for instance, 101st, 91st, or 81st that is slows down traffic.  Also, for the idiot cyclists who are too confused that the sidewalks on streets are there for a reason, please use them.  Especially on 71st between lewis and riverside.  Why ride down the middle of the slow lane? When cars are zooming by at 40mph + and the cyclist is going around 20, or so, they are impeding traffic.  Throw out all the laws you want, thats fine, but it is what it is.

Driving vehicle on the sidewalk prohibited, 37 TRO 638:  No vehicle shall be driven within or upon any sidewalk area except at a driveway or alley.

Biking on sidewalk in business district prohibited, 37 TRO 1009:  No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk within a business district.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

The town where I grew up required all bicycles and riders to be licensed.  There was a modest fee for the annual driver test and metal tag for the bicycle. It was primarily aimed at keeping the young kids safe but adults were not exempted.

I am surprised Tulsa/Oklahoma has missed this opportunity for revenue.  The money could be dedicated for bicycle lanes and trails, just like our car tag fees are dedicated to roads.  []

Under O.S. 47 2-101, vehicle licensing and driver education are under the jurisdiction of the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety.

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by 1099paralegal

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982

I don't give a damn what the laws say, CF is right.  Please don't come on these boards popping off laws that are the books, but like alot of our laws, arent enforced.

Don't preach to the choir.  Tell it to the next cop flashing the lights in your rear view mirror.

quote:
You are the idiot if you think that bicyclists don't hold up traffic.  I can rest assured that you would agree that when a bicyclist is riding parallel with the traffic on a busy 2 lane road, for instance, 101st, 91st, or 81st that is slows down traffic.  Also, for the idiot cyclists who are too confused that the sidewalks on streets are there for a reason, please use them.  Especially on 71st between lewis and riverside.  Why ride down the middle of the slow lane? When cars are zooming by at 40mph + and the cyclist is going around 20, or so, they are impeding traffic.  Throw out all the laws you want, thats fine, but it is what it is.

Driving vehicle on the sidewalk prohibited, 37 TRO 638:  No vehicle shall be driven within or upon any sidewalk area except at a driveway or alley.

Biking on sidewalk in business district prohibited, 37 TRO 1009:  No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk within a business district.

ahh once again the laws that aren't enforced.  The last time I checked, 71st between lewis and riverside is not a business district.  Neither is 101st, 91st or 81st, it is mostly residential.  

The day I get pulled over for something as childish and absurd that has to do with a cyclist, I will gladly hang up my keys and bike everywhere for a year.  If cyclists want to be afforded the same "courtesy" maybe they should follow the basic rules that everyone else has to follow. IE stopping at red lights, not crossing the street when they aren't supposed to, and last but not least, like biker fox tends to do, ride down the middle of the road.



The majority of cyclists I come in contact with all too often don't follow the rules of the road. When they do, I will extend the same courtesy to them.  When there is a sidewalk, use it.  If not, then I understand. It drives a person insane to see someone causing a minor traffic jam because they think the world should bow down to them using the entire slow lane of traffic for their personal agenda.  Have you ever witnessed a cyclist being cited for the ordinances you mentioned above?  I know I haven't.

The last time I checked, most motorists know not to drive on the sidewalk and vise versa.  Most people know not to walk down the middle of the road.  I know I was taught that at a very early age as well as look both ways before crossing, etc.

Now lets look back over title 37, section 1099.  It goes on to mention (which you ever so cleverly left out) several places where bikes are prohibited.

"The stairs and sidewalks adjacent to the Maxwell Convention Center,
including the podium on the second level, and all structures immediately adjacent to the
stairs, sidewalks and podium;
2. The fountains or sides thereof in the Civic Center Plaza; or
3. The pedestrian skybridge which spans West Sixth and West Seventh Streets
between the Maxwell Convention Center and the parking structure to the south of the
Convention Center.
C. No person shall travel, coast, or skate upon the sidewalks or rampways in
the Civic Center Parkade by means of any skateboard, roller skate, bicycle, tricycle or gocart. "

Those areas are nothing like 71st between Lewis and Riverside.  In fact, when they mention business districts, I would go out on a limb and say they probably intended that to interpret downtown areas which are mostly business districts/plazas.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982
ahh once again the laws that aren't enforced.  The last time I checked, 71st between lewis and riverside is not a business district.  Neither is 101st, 91st or 81st, it is mostly residential.  

Check the zoning map again for 71st, between Lewis and Riverside.  Various segments are zoned CS, CG, CH.

You do not seem to be comprehending the statutory definition of bicycles.  The BLACK letter of the LAW, in plain ENGLISH, 37 TRO 1000 defines bicyclists as DRIVERS of VEHICLES.

37 TRO 638 prohibits vehicles from operating on sidewalks, business district or not.

quote:
The day I get pulled over for something as childish and absurd that has to do with a cyclist, I will gladly hang up my keys and bike everywhere for a year.  If cyclists want to be afforded the same "courtesy" maybe they should follow the basic rules that everyone else has to follow. IE stopping at red lights, not crossing the street when they aren't supposed to, and last but not least, like biker fox tends to do, ride down the middle of the road.

The majority of cyclists I come in contact with all too often don't follow the rules of the road. When they do, I will extend the same courtesy to them.  When there is a sidewalk, use it.  If not, then I understand. It drives a person insane to see someone causing a minor traffic jam because they think the world should bow down to them using the entire slow lane of traffic for their personal agenda.  Have you ever witnessed a cyclist being cited for the ordinances you mentioned above?  I know I haven't.

You are correct.  Bicyclists are the only DRIVERS of VEHICLES legally allowed to operate, in TRAFFIC, on Oklahoma roadways, WITHOUT proper training and licensing.

It's not your fault you are IGNORANT.  The Oklahoma Department of Public Safety FAILED you.  Also, you do not have the benefit of Oklahoma case law that judicially interprets the statutes.

And, you are also correct about motorist too.  ALL motorists OBEY the law.  NO motorist run red lights.  NO motorists EVER go over the speed limit.  And, NO motorists are EVER guilty of MURDERING 5 innocent people in the middle of Memorial, while intoxicated.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982
Have you ever witnessed a cyclist being cited for the ordinances you mentioned above?  I know I haven't.

Tony Cellino, Tulsa Municipal Court Clerk, Tulsa Municipal Court Judges Crawford, Bishop, Hofmeister, and Powers(ret.) will be more than happy to testify on that issue.

[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...

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder
If we want to talk about THE LAW, there are minimum speed limits on expressways.  

The minimum speed rule as it relates to bicycles has already been litigated in Tulsa Municipal.  Judge Burk Bishop presiding.

Holding: Because bicycles can not move at the minimum speed, 35 mph, on the Broken Arrow Expressway, the rule is not applicable.  

37 TRO 1000: Every person operating a bicycle in the City of Tulsa shall be subject to the provisions of this title applicable to the driver of a vehicle, except as to those provisions which by their very nature can have no application.

quote:
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.  

Again, bicyclists are the only DRIVERS of VEHICLES legally allowed to operate in TRAFFIC on Oklahoma roadways, WITHOUT proper training or licensing.  Why don't you go preach it to the lepers in the State Sausage Factory and the Commissioner of Department of Public Safety?

I am sure OHSO would also love to hear from you.  

quote:
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.

Those who do not exercise their rights DESERVE to lose them.-----Confucious.

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by 1099paralegal

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder
If we want to talk about THE LAW, there are minimum speed limits on expressways.  

The minimum speed rule as it relates to bicycles has already been litigated in Tulsa Municipal.  Judge Burk Bishop presiding.

Holding: Because bicycles can not move at the minimum speed, 35 mph, on the Broken Arrow Expressway, the rule is not applicable.  

37 TRO 1000: Every person operating a bicycle in the City of Tulsa shall be subject to the provisions of this title applicable to the driver of a vehicle, except as to those provisions which by their very nature can have no application.

quote:
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.  

Again, bicyclists are the only DRIVERS of VEHICLES legally allowed to operate in TRAFFIC on Oklahoma roadways, WITHOUT proper training or licensing.  Why don't you go preach it to the lepers in the State Sausage Factory and the Commissioner of Department of Public Safety?

I am sure OHSO would also love to hear from you.  

quote:
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.

Those who do not exercise their rights DESERVE to lose them.-----Confucious.

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.

[cannon_fodder]

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

ps. I voted for you in the last election.  Sad, but you were the least bad choice. []