I guess I would say it depends on what you call 'a complete stop'. I bike to work all the time on very slow side streets. I so stop, but it is just for a second, in other words I don't put my feet on the ground unless I see a car coming in the other direction.
I hate to be the Law enforcement POV guy, well not really, but traffic laws are made for people who use the road ways. These laws should apply to those who ride bikes as well. It's simple rule of law... If for no other reason than to be able to assign fault when God forbid there is an accident. I cannot count how many times I have slammed on my brakes entering an intersection after stopping at a stop sign only to watch a bike go by without even slowing down...
I look at this in a similar way to the speed limit on the freeway. It's 65, but most go over that. I think the Police, generally, let folks go a little over. Of course, they are within their rights to stop someone going 1mph over, but it seems like they only stop you if you are going wayyy over (70-75mph).
Slowing down at a stop-sign, looking both ways, being responsible are signs of a good bike rider. Not coming to a complete stop seems like a silly reason to give someone a ticket.
Well, I feel like it might depend on the situation. Did the person really essentially stop? Or did they blow right on through?
Yesterday I almost hit another biker who blew through a stop sign. I was stopped waiting to turn left, and when it was my turn, this biker passed me on the left, no stopping at all at the stop sign. And I did signal but I think she was already beside me and didn't see it.
Tom, do you want to do away with speed limits then? I mean people are not abiding by them anyway so we might as well just do away with the law(s) right? How about any other traffic laws? I don't care what anyone says, California stops are dangerous plain and simple. Will you make it though safely? Probably. It's always the car, pedestrian, or bike coming that you "didn't" see that ruins your weekend! Why not stop at the stop sign, (in a car, or on a bike), and if you have to triple check so be it...
I'll but in and say that I agree with the law that bikes stop at stop signs. That being said, though, I know that people will fudge on that law. That's a good reason to keep the law in place, IMO. People will always want to push it a little bit, so if we make the law so that it is a yield for bikes, then people will be going through the stop signs even faster, I think.
I wonder what the stats are in places where it is a yield for bikes instead of a stop. Are there more accidents?
Seriously, four new letter in the GT today and THERE ALL ABOUT THIS TOPIC!!!! God, get a life Corvallis!
I swear I do not miss commenting in the GT at all. Of course the quantity of comments has decreased to about a quarter of what it once was since they gave Barefoot the boot.
Sorry...haven't been too active online as of late.
Hey, COE, I thought you were the one who was all about taking personal responsibility and getting government out of our lives and we don't need no stinking nanny state. So, why do I need the goverment protecting me from myself. Someone wrote in recently saying that Stop Signs should be Yield signs...I kinda like that idea....
I hate to disagree, but with that logic we should just do away with all laws right? While I think Government needs to saty out of my life, we have to have laws. Laws like seat belt laws, and helmet laws I can see your argument, and I tend to agree with you. Rolling through a stop sign and t-boning a bike/car and maybe causing injury to someone else is vastly different I think!
I would add we are caught in a catch 22. If we are handing out citations for what is seen as petty things we have too much time on our hands and there simply is not enough to do. If there is an area that speeders, reckless drivers, drug activity ect frequent and there is little or no police presence then it's, what are the lazy bastards doing. The whole where's the police when you need them thing.
I can sympathize with that sentiment COE and, no, that isn't fair. I'm guessing, though, that Ajai wasn't saying the Corvallis cops are lazy, just that this is a slow-crime town.
I do have to say that Corvallis cops busted that heinous group of car-jackers right on Monroe St. a couple of years ago. That was impressive!
There is more crime than is actually reported or uncovered. Knowing this, it can be frustrating to see cops harassing people for minor offenses. Yes I have seen this, quite often.
I have a lot of respect for the profession, that is why I hold those who choose it to very high standards considering they have more privileges and the power to destroy peoples lives at a whim. That respect does not blind me to the abuse I have witnessed throughout my life.
Incidentally, I was one of those people falsely arrested by Officer Cox. The charges were recently dropped.
I suppose you have a point, Ajai. I am only vaguely familiar with the Cox story. I'm sure all the CVO cops aren't bad guys, though, but obviously if he was protected his supervisors must have been. Perhaps other cops didn't like what was going on but just had to suck it up if they wanted to keep their jobs. Just a thought.
Yeah the Coxs' out there give us all a bad name. That's the problem though Because of one bad apple, the entire barrel seems tainted. It comes with the territory I suppose.
I do agree with you about CPD's management. This went on for too long. A blind eye was given simply because of stats. No one bothered to see if there was a flaw in the process. The DA even endorsed his achievements... I would add to the list and ask where were the public defenders? Why was the process lost on them?
This one fell through the cracks. I would say though that on the whole we do have very good and professional law enforcement agencies in this County and in this State. Go back east and you'll find it's a completely different world!
I've met two CPD officers who were decent people. Maybe three. Most others seem to treat folks as a criminals simply because they am there. I don't think that is right.
And while Cox might be gone, the incentive that leads toward abuse is the same. It becomes that old story: everyone builds a fence to keep themselves safe, but they are actually building themselves their own concentration camp.
I'm not a criminal, nor a fan of violent crime, but a police state is the inevitable outcome of these ridiculous zero tolerance policies.
Eh..maybe it's more 50/50, good cop/bad cop ratio. I've met more than three, more like five or six, same number as the other kind. Then good cops can do bad things, and vice-versa, it's a morally relative universe.
But it just takes one jerk to make a lasting impression. And that lesson, given to Corvallis residents for years, is that the criminal justice system is more of the former than the latter.
Actually, I think it's kinda dumb that people on bikes have to come to a complete stop at stop signs...
ReplyDeleteI guess I would say it depends on what you call 'a complete stop'. I bike to work all the time on very slow side streets. I so stop, but it is just for a second, in other words I don't put my feet on the ground unless I see a car coming in the other direction.
ReplyDeleteI hate to be the Law enforcement POV guy, well not really, but traffic laws are made for people who use the road ways. These laws should apply to those who ride bikes as well. It's simple rule of law... If for no other reason than to be able to assign fault when God forbid there is an accident. I cannot count how many times I have slammed on my brakes entering an intersection after stopping at a stop sign only to watch a bike go by without even slowing down...
ReplyDeleteI look at this in a similar way to the speed limit on the freeway. It's 65, but most go over that. I think the Police, generally, let folks go a little over. Of course, they are within their rights to stop someone going 1mph over, but it seems like they only stop you if you are going wayyy over (70-75mph).
ReplyDeleteSlowing down at a stop-sign, looking both ways, being responsible are signs of a good bike rider. Not coming to a complete stop seems like a silly reason to give someone a ticket.
Well, I feel like it might depend on the situation. Did the person really essentially stop? Or did they blow right on through?
ReplyDeleteYesterday I almost hit another biker who blew through a stop sign. I was stopped waiting to turn left, and when it was my turn, this biker passed me on the left, no stopping at all at the stop sign. And I did signal but I think she was already beside me and didn't see it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTom, do you want to do away with speed limits then? I mean people are not abiding by them anyway so we might as well just do away with the law(s) right? How about any other traffic laws? I don't care what anyone says, California stops are dangerous plain and simple. Will you make it though safely? Probably. It's always the car, pedestrian, or bike coming that you "didn't" see that ruins your weekend! Why not stop at the stop sign, (in a car, or on a bike), and if you have to triple check so be it...
ReplyDeleteI'll but in and say that I agree with the law that bikes stop at stop signs. That being said, though, I know that people will fudge on that law. That's a good reason to keep the law in place, IMO. People will always want to push it a little bit, so if we make the law so that it is a yield for bikes, then people will be going through the stop signs even faster, I think.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what the stats are in places where it is a yield for bikes instead of a stop. Are there more accidents?
A rolling stop is good enough.
ReplyDeleteI do find it fascinating that this topic gets so much attention. It's a cultural divide that really doesn't matter.
With how police keep themselves busy one may assume it is safe to say that there is absolutely no real crime in this town.
Seriously, four new letter in the GT today and THERE ALL ABOUT THIS TOPIC!!!! God, get a life Corvallis!
ReplyDeleteI swear I do not miss commenting in the GT at all. Of course the quantity of comments has decreased to about a quarter of what it once was since they gave Barefoot the boot.
Hey Ajai! Glad to see you here.
ReplyDeleteI know, I can't believe the number of letters on this topic and the same people are rehashing the same comments. Uggh!
Yes, there are not nearly as many posts without Barefoot :)
I tried to talk him into coming here, but I don't think he is going to. Said something about not wanting to have to join the site...
Sorry...haven't been too active online as of late.
ReplyDeleteHey, COE, I thought you were the one who was all about taking personal responsibility and getting government out of our lives and we don't need no stinking nanny state. So, why do I need the goverment protecting me from myself. Someone wrote in recently saying that Stop Signs should be Yield signs...I kinda like that idea....
Two editorials on the bike issue today. Ugghhh...really, news is slow.
ReplyDeleteTom, how are things?
ReplyDeleteI hate to disagree, but with that logic we should just do away with all laws right? While I think Government needs to saty out of my life, we have to have laws. Laws like seat belt laws, and helmet laws I can see your argument, and I tend to agree with you. Rolling through a stop sign and t-boning a bike/car and maybe causing injury to someone else is vastly different I think!
"It is safe to say that there is absolutely no real crime in this town."
ReplyDeleteI beg to differ Ajai. Take a look at the Benton County jail roster. There is plenty of crime going on.
"I hate to disagree"
ReplyDeleteDon't hate it too much, we don't want this forum to get boring! ;)
Now, if you can get Barefoot to start posting, things will really get interesting :)
With all due respect, COE, you misquoted me. The full sentence wass:
ReplyDeleteWith how police keep themselves busy one may assume it is safe to say that there is absolutely no real crime in this town.
Even more letters on the bike issue today...pure torture.
ReplyDeleteThe GT is as good at deciding which letters to post as it is at moderating comments.
Ajai, I understand what your saying...
ReplyDeleteI would add we are caught in a catch 22. If we are handing out citations for what is seen as petty things we have too much time on our hands and there simply is not enough to do. If there is an area that speeders, reckless drivers, drug activity ect frequent and there is little or no police presence then it's, what are the lazy bastards doing. The whole where's the police when you need them thing.
I can sympathize with that sentiment COE and, no, that isn't fair. I'm guessing, though, that Ajai wasn't saying the Corvallis cops are lazy, just that this is a slow-crime town.
ReplyDeleteI do have to say that Corvallis cops busted that heinous group of car-jackers right on Monroe St. a couple of years ago. That was impressive!
Or if you like:
ReplyDeleteCorvallis cops are the shiznit!
There is more crime than is actually reported or uncovered. Knowing this, it can be frustrating to see cops harassing people for minor offenses. Yes I have seen this, quite often.
ReplyDeleteI have a lot of respect for the profession, that is why I hold those who choose it to very high standards considering they have more privileges and the power to destroy peoples lives at a whim. That respect does not blind me to the abuse I have witnessed throughout my life.
Incidentally, I was one of those people falsely arrested by Officer Cox. The charges were recently dropped.
That is unfortunate that you were a victim of the, apparently, unethical Cox. One bad apple, though...
ReplyDeleteOne bad apple that was consistantly rewarded for bad behavior is reflective of the institution as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI suppose you have a point, Ajai. I am only vaguely familiar with the Cox story. I'm sure all the CVO cops aren't bad guys, though, but obviously if he was protected his supervisors must have been. Perhaps other cops didn't like what was going on but just had to suck it up if they wanted to keep their jobs. Just a thought.
ReplyDeletePossible with a few, but I seriously doubt it.
ReplyDeleteYeah the Coxs' out there give us all a bad name. That's the problem though Because of one bad apple, the entire barrel seems tainted. It comes with the territory I suppose.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you about CPD's management. This went on for too long. A blind eye was given simply because of stats. No one bothered to see if there was a flaw in the process. The DA even endorsed his achievements... I would add to the list and ask where were the public defenders? Why was the process lost on them?
This one fell through the cracks. I would say though that on the whole we do have very good and professional law enforcement agencies in this County and in this State. Go back east and you'll find it's a completely different world!
I've met two CPD officers who were decent people. Maybe three. Most others seem to treat folks as a criminals simply because they am there. I don't think that is right.
ReplyDeleteAnd while Cox might be gone, the incentive that leads toward abuse is the same. It becomes that old story: everyone builds a fence to keep themselves safe, but they are actually building themselves their own concentration camp.
I'm not a criminal, nor a fan of violent crime, but a police state is the inevitable outcome of these ridiculous zero tolerance policies.
Eh..maybe it's more 50/50, good cop/bad cop ratio. I've met more than three, more like five or six, same number as the other kind. Then good cops can do bad things, and vice-versa, it's a morally relative universe.
ReplyDeleteBut it just takes one jerk to make a lasting impression. And that lesson, given to Corvallis residents for years, is that the criminal justice system is more of the former than the latter.
Well hopefully I tip the scale to 51-49 of course 51% being good :)
ReplyDelete