Feb 04, 2021 at 06:34 PM
This is bulldoodoo.
Close Encounters of the #%&*@! Kind (Legal too)
Feb 04, 2021 at 06:40 PM
sorry, just wanna make sure... this is regulation for NCY, requiring ALL riders (messengers, delivery people, commuters, gramma on a citibike) to have at least one hand on the bars, and if seated to be seated on the saddle. You think this is bad idea? Have you been to New York? like ever?
Feb 04, 2021 at 07:09 PM
I honestly don't see the issue with the items in bold. I'm surprised having more passengers than seats is legal right now.
(Really though, the laws are secondary to the jack-booted thugs enforcing them)
Feb 04, 2021 at 08:03 PM
Well first, this is for Suffolk County. Much less foot and bike traffic there and definitely far fewer cyclist-pedestrian accidents. People in Suffolk are waaaaaaay less affected by cyclists than in NYC. The intent behind this law is not to protect any of the people listed. It is mostly affecting cyclists, teens on bmx bikes, and those not fortunate enough to be able to drive everywhere (in other words: Cyclists). I don't have any data or recall any major news stories of damage caused by cyclists in Suffolk County and I bet that's because its pretty rare.
2nd, what the fuck is trick riding? This has HUGE Footloose energy. BMX is literally an olympic sport. Kids should be able to "have all or more than one wheel" not touching the ground. If they don't want "trick riding" done in public, they'd better build space for people to do so legally.
3rd, literally all of us would have broken these laws on any ride ever. Hands off the bars, no reflectors, no "horn" on our bikes, standing (lol). The only part that makes sense (Weaving in and out of traffic) is already illegal if bikes are considered vehicles.
4th, in a place where there is a significant undocumented population, resulting in folks not being able to obtain a license and becoming bicycle-bound to get anywhere, these rules could be problematic.
The aspects of these laws just seem to put extra undue responsibility on cyclists. They're not saying that they're going to build skateparks so kids can "trick ride" safely. They aren't adding bike lanes to avoid cyclists being on the road. In a place like Suffolk County where many folks ride a bike for recreation and some ride for work, it seems like bad step towards very anti-cyclist legislation.
2nd, what the fuck is trick riding? This has HUGE Footloose energy. BMX is literally an olympic sport. Kids should be able to "have all or more than one wheel" not touching the ground. If they don't want "trick riding" done in public, they'd better build space for people to do so legally.
3rd, literally all of us would have broken these laws on any ride ever. Hands off the bars, no reflectors, no "horn" on our bikes, standing (lol). The only part that makes sense (Weaving in and out of traffic) is already illegal if bikes are considered vehicles.
4th, in a place where there is a significant undocumented population, resulting in folks not being able to obtain a license and becoming bicycle-bound to get anywhere, these rules could be problematic.
The aspects of these laws just seem to put extra undue responsibility on cyclists. They're not saying that they're going to build skateparks so kids can "trick ride" safely. They aren't adding bike lanes to avoid cyclists being on the road. In a place like Suffolk County where many folks ride a bike for recreation and some ride for work, it seems like bad step towards very anti-cyclist legislation.
Feb 04, 2021 at 08:15 PM
Also, we all prob agree that even though it's illegal, folks are not going to actually be fined a bunch of money for taking their hands off of the handlebars. Most of these won't really be enforced, but I would argue that makes this an even worse set of rules.
Feb 04, 2021 at 08:36 PM
I suspect the main driver behind these laws may be to target groups of teens who ride wheelies against traffic on roadways. There seems to be a strategy amongst DAs to throw a bunch of charges against a defendant (in this case: trick riding, no reflectors, not riding not he saddle, etc) and then having them plead guilty to a subset of the infractions. My guess is that there has been an outcry over riders like these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2SUUqt0xoQ
I agree with Rob's points about the problems with this law and how it can adversely impact "law abiding cyclists".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2SUUqt0xoQI agree with Rob's points about the problems with this law and how it can adversely impact "law abiding cyclists".
Feb 04, 2021 at 09:23 PM
"By trick riding, weaving, or zig-zagging course, unless such irregular course is necessary
for the safe operation in compliance with this law and New York State Vehicle and Traffic
Law. "
This strikes me as how pornography has been defined. "I know it when I see it."
It reads like a catchall for pulling cyclists over.
This strikes me as how pornography has been defined. "I know it when I see it."
It reads like a catchall for pulling cyclists over.
Feb 04, 2021 at 10:18 PM
“Footloose energy” lol!
Feb 04, 2021 at 11:43 PM
Does it state the proposed penalties for these egregious violations?
EDIT: (decided not to be a lazy bum and went ahead and clicked the link myself)
A. Any person violating the bicycle equipment requirements established in Section 3(A) of this law shall be subject to a written warning for each offense. The violator shall receive education on the bicycle equipment requirements with each written warning received.
B. Any person committing a traffic infraction or other offense enumerated in Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 of this law shall be guilty of a violation, punishable by a fine not to exceed $250 per infraction.
C. Any person, upon a duly noticed trial, hearing, and conviction, who operates a bicycle under the influence of drugs or alcohol in violation of section 7 of this law shall be subject to the same penalties as set forth in New York State Vehicle and Traffic Laws §1193, except that any violation committed while operating a bicycle shall not affect the status of the violator’s motor vehicle operator’s license.
D. The parent of any person who is under the age of 14 operating or sitting as a passenger on a bicycle who is not wearing a safety-certified bicycle helmet in violation of Section 3(B) of this law shall be subject to a fine of $50 per offense. The parent may void the ticket by sending proof of purchase of a safety-certified bicycle helmet within thirty (30) days of receipt of the ticket.
I do like part D though I doubt they're promising policy to help those who cannot afford said helmet acquire one. In that way it just seems like a great way to put bicycles behind a paywall
Feb 05, 2021 at 12:03 AM
Totally, at least part D functions like broken tail light ticket, where if you prove you fixed the problem that could cause harm, you don't have to pay the arbitrary fine. Though it is kind of weird that you have to BUY a helmet when a lot of folks may have a helmet in their garage that they don't wear.Nathaniel Picard Busky said:Does it state the proposed penalties for these egregious violations?EDIT: (decided not to be a lazy bum and went ahead and clicked the link myself)A. Any person violating the bicycle equipment requirements established in Section 3(A) of this law shall be subject to a written warning for each offense. The violator shall receive education on the bicycle equipment requirements with each written warning received.B. Any person committing a traffic infraction or other offense enumerated in Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 of this law shall be guilty of a violation, punishable by a fine not to exceed $250 per infraction.C. Any person, upon a duly noticed trial, hearing, and conviction, who operates a bicycle under the influence of drugs or alcohol in violation of section 7 of this law shall be subject to the same penalties as set forth in New York State Vehicle and Traffic Laws §1193, except that any violation committed while operating a bicycle shall not affect the status of the violator’s motor vehicle operator’s license.D. The parent of any person who is under the age of 14 operating or sitting as a passenger on a bicycle who is not wearing a safety-certified bicycle helmet in violation of Section 3(B) of this law shall be subject to a fine of $50 per offense. The parent may void the ticket by sending proof of purchase of a safety-certified bicycle helmet within thirty (30) days of receipt of the ticket.I do like part D though I doubt they're promising policy to help those who cannot afford said helmet acquire one. In that way it just seems like a great way to put bicycles behind a paywall
Apr 07, 2021 at 08:15 PM
Apr 08, 2021 at 01:16 AM
Damn, that hurts. The guy in the back has his bottle out also. This definitely wouldn't have helped him, but I've trained it into a habit for myself now that if I see someone in front of me directly or a few riders ahead grabbing their bottle, I either don't reach for mine or put it back immediately. Both hands on my bars when the guys in front only have one.
Apr 08, 2021 at 11:42 PM
Article in Newsday. Once again LI showing it's "quality."
Apr 08, 2021 at 11:57 PM
jesus christ, "motorist discrimination" got me good
Apr 09, 2021 at 01:07 AM
I can't believe anyone would sign their name to that shit.
Apr 09, 2021 at 11:59 AM
I did pass a cycling proficiency test , most kids in the UK ( of my age) did them at school.
Apr 09, 2021 at 07:35 PM
Bill must be a carryover from Robert Moses' parkway design staff.AndrewJohnson said:Article in Newsday. Once again LI showing it's "quality."
Apr 15, 2021 at 02:35 PM
Happy for the Law. Interestingly in the video footage, I show up at about 1m19s...
Apr 15, 2021 at 03:07 PM
Blue belly jersey looking goodAndrewJohnson said:Happy for the Law. Interestingly in the video footage, I show up at about 1m19s...
Apr 15, 2021 at 05:02 PM
I'm glad the law passed.
But:
"The minimum distance requirement does not apply on roadways that have clearly marked bicycle lanes."
I haven't read it, but is there a provision for obstructions in the bike lane forcing a cyclist out of the lane? A defense attorney will say as long as the bike lane existed, the driver cannot be held responsible for the 3 foot law.
Also, this passes responsibility onto cops enforcing the law, which they don't generally do with cycling laws except for cyclists going through red lights.
The answer always is infrastructure. Build protected bike lanes, and redesign roadways so that Tiger Woods cannot drive 80mph on a 40mph turn.
Passing laws that make us safe because cops are enforcing them is not going to work out well.
But:
"The minimum distance requirement does not apply on roadways that have clearly marked bicycle lanes."
I haven't read it, but is there a provision for obstructions in the bike lane forcing a cyclist out of the lane? A defense attorney will say as long as the bike lane existed, the driver cannot be held responsible for the 3 foot law.
Also, this passes responsibility onto cops enforcing the law, which they don't generally do with cycling laws except for cyclists going through red lights.
The answer always is infrastructure. Build protected bike lanes, and redesign roadways so that Tiger Woods cannot drive 80mph on a 40mph turn.
Passing laws that make us safe because cops are enforcing them is not going to work out well.
Apr 15, 2021 at 05:27 PM
In the end I agree. I doubt if the Police will really enforce the law. And sadly Long Island is a disaster when it comes to bike lanes or shoulders... Heck even for road surface we are a third world county...
Apr 16, 2021 at 01:38 PM
I just saw a post from the Huntington Bicycle Club:
Dear Fellow Cyclist,
The following bill, the "Idaho Stop" or S920/A3104, which will allow cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign, is now under consideration by the NY State Senate and Assembly.
To help enact these bills, please click these links to send this message:
• Your State Senator
• Your State Assembly Member
This is all you need to say:
Dear _________________________
Please support S920/A3104-The Idaho Stop, allowing cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield, and a red light as a stop sign.
By passing S920/A3104, biking will be easier and safer in New York.
Thank you for your consideration of this.
Karen H. Gellert
President
Huntington Bicycle Club
Apr 16, 2021 at 02:44 PM
Done !
Mar 26, 2023 at 04:01 PM
Sounds like todays CRCA race was all kinds of trouble.
Mar 26, 2023 at 04:14 PM
That suck for so many reasons. I hope the pedestrian is ok--and doesn't sue.
The Conservancy is starting to talk about re-designing the drives. There's a webinar on the possible redesigns this Tuesday, so I'm fearing all sorts of anti-bike spleen will be shared.
If anyone knows what happened, please share. I want to know going in. I'll reach out to some friends in CRCA to see if I can learn more.
The Conservancy is starting to talk about re-designing the drives. There's a webinar on the possible redesigns this Tuesday, so I'm fearing all sorts of anti-bike spleen will be shared.
If anyone knows what happened, please share. I want to know going in. I'll reach out to some friends in CRCA to see if I can learn more.
Mar 27, 2023 at 01:22 PM
From what I heard yesterday, someone was sprinting for the line with their head down in the rec line and slammed into a pedestrian. Former KCC member Diego Sanchez said he has a video of it, but I didn't get to catch up with him after the race to hear more.
Alex Kochatau (Randall's Island Organizer) sent an email asking to please not share the video on socials
Alex Kochatau (Randall's Island Organizer) sent an email asking to please not share the video on socials
Mar 27, 2023 at 02:47 PM
Mar 28, 2023 at 05:55 PM
That sounds pretty f-ing bad.
Mar 28, 2023 at 06:43 PM
FWIW, my sources at CRCA said basically the same.
Mar 30, 2023 at 02:10 PM