Adventures in Cop Logic, Chapter the First

[brendan]

Does that light have a leading pedestrian interval (LPI) walk signal (walk signal 3+ second before green light for parallel traffic) during which you proceeded?

If not, you got a verbal warning for breaking the law, which is about the best as it gets. If it happened to me, I wouldn’t feel it was worth likely changing that into an actual ticket to engage the officer.

I say this knowing that I often make a similar decision to proceed regardless of LPI (and timing) or not.

B

PS – my favorite story is a cyclist friend of mine rolled up to a deserted red light in dc, and was then joined by a two wheeled police officer who rolled up right next to him. I’m assuming my friend was aware of the officer, which would have explained why he just stayed there instead of proceeding after checking to see if things were clear.

I can’t recall if it was a bike or motorcycle mounted officer. The officer said something along the lines of “what are you waiting for?” My friend said “it’s a red light, officer.” To which the officer responded, “bike rules.”, smiled and proceeded through it. As did my friend…

[dasgeh]

I would love to see local jurisdictions decriminalize minor violations, like stop sign running, for bikes, like they did for small amounts of pot. Even leave the laws and on the books, just be clear that they won’t be enforced absent special circumstances (like causing danger to others).

[baiskeli]

@dasgeh 86477 wrote:

I would love to see local jurisdictions decriminalize minor violations, like stop sign running, for bikes, like they did for small amounts of pot. Even leave the laws and on the books, just be clear that they won’t be enforced absent special circumstances (like causing danger to others).

They’ve done that de facto with jaywalking. But I’m sure this cop stops and castigates ever jaywalker or pedestrian walking against lights that he sees (sarcasm).

[brendan]

@dasgeh 86477 wrote:

I would love to see local jurisdictions decriminalize minor violations, like stop sign running, for bikes, like they did for small amounts of pot. Even leave the laws and on the books, just be clear that they won’t be enforced absent special circumstances (like causing danger to others).

I wouldn’t be surprised if DC has nearly decriminalized it. I’m generally sheepish about slow-rolling through stop signs and stop/look/go for red lights when there is law enforcement around, but I’m convinced the local officers in DC have been told to de-prioritize enforcement on cyclists due to the things I’ve seen happen in front of law enforcement that get ignored (perhaps with suggestions to pursue only if the cyclist is clearly causing danger for him/herself or others).

One big example I can think of is that participants in the dc bike party rides only tend to get in trouble for open container/public intoxication infractions, and not for the dozens (or perhaps grosses…) of traffic infractions that are easily observable.

B

[americancyclo]

Did I read it somewhere that in DC it’s ok to ride through a red if the peds have a walk (usually in an LPI case)?

yes, yes, i did.

Bicyclists’ use of leading pedestrian intervals: Bicyclists can get the same head start as pedestrians at signalized intersections, where pedestrians are given few extra seconds to start crossing a street. Also allowing bicyclists the opportunity to get into the intersection before cars makes them more visible to drivers.

http://www.waba.org/blog/2013/10/the-bicycle-safety-amendment-act-of-2013-victory-for-d-c-cyclists/

[Brendan von Buckingham]

My guffaw was basically that he told me it was OK for me to go through the red light if I used the crosswalk like a jaywalking pedestrian. If he went by the book, and told me to not go through reds and here’s a ticket for the bother, that I would understand and accept. His random alternative interpretation of what’s OK, is what I don’t understand. That’s just advice, and it was stupid advice.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@dasgeh 86477 wrote:

I would love to see local jurisdictions decriminalize minor violations, like stop sign running, for bikes, like they did for small amounts of pot. Even leave the laws and on the books, just be clear that they won’t be enforced absent special circumstances (like causing danger to others).

You mean like they’ve done with cars that run red lights at intersections without cameras?

[KLizotte]

@americancyclo 86485 wrote:

Did I read it somewhere that in DC it’s ok to ride through a red if the peds have a walk (usually in an LPI case)?

yes, yes, i did.

http://www.waba.org/blog/2013/10/the-bicycle-safety-amendment-act-of-2013-victory-for-d-c-cyclists/

The distinction they left out is whether the cyclist has to be in the crosswalk when using the LPI to be legal. I’m going to hazard that being in the crosswalk is what was intended since the alternative will simply confuse and enrage drivers.

[cyclingfool]

@KLizotte 86509 wrote:

The distinction they left out is whether the cyclist has to be in the crosswalk when using the LPI to be legal. I’m going to hazard that being in the crosswalk is what was intended since the alternative will simply confuse and enrage drivers.

I hadn’t been treating it that way. I’d been starting in the travel lane with the LPI, which is what I thought was now allowed under the law.

Starting with the LPI in the crosswalk doesn’t do too much to increase visibility, so if that’s what the law says, then it doesn’t help much.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@KLizotte 86509 wrote:

The distinction they left out is whether the cyclist has to be in the crosswalk when using the LPI to be legal. I’m going to hazard that being in the crosswalk is what was intended since the alternative will simply confuse and enrage drivers.

If you’re in the crosswalk of course you cross with the pedestrians, so no change would have been needed. The fact that they specifically chose to change law suggests to me that they are referring to bikes in the lane.

[americancyclo]

@KLizotte 86509 wrote:

The distinction they left out

To me, that means there is no distinction, and since i regularly use the travel lane, that is where I’ll be while I cross the intersection. Rage on drivers, rage on.

[dasgeh]

@KLizotte 86509 wrote:

The distinction they left out is whether the cyclist has to be in the crosswalk when using the LPI to be legal. I’m going to hazard that being in the crosswalk is what was intended since the alternative will simply confuse and enrage drivers.

I believe the intention of the law is for cyclists to go from wherever they are. There would be no need to change the law for allowing cyclists to go with the LPI while they’re in the crosswalk.

This is the language from the bill

Quote:

“Sec. 9d. Bicyclists’ use of leading pedestrian intervals.
“(a) A bicyclist may cross at an intersection while following the pedestrian traffic control signal for the bicyclist’s direction of travel unless otherwise directed by traffic signs or traffic control devices.
“(b) A bicyclist may cross an intersection where a leading pedestrian interval is used.”

[brendan]

Ugh. Is that really the verbiage? On purpose even?

B

[americancyclo]

(b) A bicyclist may cross an intersection where a leading pedestrian interval is used.

even if it’s not the LPI for the direction I’m going? :p

[DismalScientist]

Are there any intersections that bicyclists cannot cross (at the proper time)? :confused:

[Author]

Posts