Adventures in Cop Logic, Chapter the First

[brendan]

@americancyclo 86523 wrote:

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

Seriously, what was section b) *intended* to mean, because it’s literally saying something almost useless. Section a) also seems problematic, as it appears to me to indicate that I can use the LPI as permission to proceed *unless* there’s a contradictory sign or…traffic signal?

Am I just not well versed in decoding the law here?

Is this too pedantic:

“(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.”

Literal translation: you can use the walk signal to proceed unless it is contradicted by other traffic control devices (such as a stop light).

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

Literal translation: a cyclist can cross an intersection where a LPI is installed. It doesn’t specify if a cyclist can cross an intersection where an LPI is not installed, nor does it state anything about whether the LPI is turned on, turned toward the cyclist or presenting any state information to the cyclist.

B

[cyclingfool]

I agree it’s poorly written.

FWIW, I take (a) to mean cross with the walk sign unless a street sign or bike-specific traffic light directs otherwise, not just a red light, otherwise (a) is also saying nothing.

(b) is unnecessary since the situation is already covered by (a).

[lordofthemark]

I take it to mean that as soon as the ped signal turns white, I can go IN THE GENERAL TRAVEL LANE. I try to do that (though the LPI is so short, at least at places where this benefits me like Eye and South Cap, typically by the time I have actually started rolling forward the traffic light is green) and I do not consider that I am doing an Idaho.

[oldbikechick]

@lordofthemark 86533 wrote:

I take it to mean that as soon as the ped signal turns white, I can go IN THE GENERAL TRAVEL LANE. I try to do that (though the LPI is so short, at least at places where this benefits me like Eye and South Cap, typically by the time I have actually started rolling forward the traffic light is green) and I do not consider that I am doing an Idaho.

I used to do this at the intersection of 14th St and C St SW where there is a generous LPI to cross 14th. I did so from the travel lane so as to not ride on the sidewalk to get to the crosswalk since it is a gauntlet of people exiting doors and parking garages. Until one day a colleague witnessed it and was horrified at the scofflaw death-defying stunt (which to her looked like going through a red light at a busy intersection). So, I went back to the truly death-defying stunt of riding down the sidewalk, or waiting for the green light in the traffic lane and turning onto what is essentially a highway on-ramp together with three lanes worth of cars. Now that I know it is actually NOT scofflaw behavior, I will go back to shocking my colleagues!

[Brendan von Buckingham]

@oldbikechick 86565 wrote:

Until one day a colleague witnessed it and was horrified at the scofflaw death-defying stunt (which to her looked like going through a red light at a busy intersection).

Which gets back to my larger point that non-cyclists (cops included), beyond one or two fundamentals, pretty much have no idea what they’re talking about, and invent “rules” to make up the difference.

I have no idea how free climbers scale cliffs without equipment. So I don’t give them advice how to do it.

[kcb203]

@baiskeli 86479 wrote:

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).

A couple years ago, I saw an Arlington cop threaten a jaywalking pedestrian with jail time for no reason. I saw the entire episode, and the cop was just nutso.

[Author]

Posts