Ticketed for "lane straddling"
Shrieks
I got ticketed this morning around 9 a.m. on Bowers Ave. in Santa
Clara for lane-splitting. The ticket calls it "lane straddling". I
asked the good officer, a moto cop, BTW, whether there was a law
against what I had done and he basically said there were four things
that covered it:
1. Driving at an unsafe speed for traffic conditions. Traffic was at a
completely standstill and he says I was doing around 15.
2. Weaving between lanes or not sticking to one lane.
3. Passing on the right.
4. Sharing a lane with a car. Apparently two bikes can share a lane,
but not a car and a bike. This was a new one for me.
Anyone know what sections of the traffic code I should be looking at
for this? Would the DMV website have traffic regulations online?
I don't intend to fight this given that the officer was polite, a moto
cop himself, he probably has better stuff to do than show up in court
etc., but I figure I should know exactly what I can and can't do given
there's some vagueness about all this. And I know what to do to avoid
another wasted day in traffic school.
Thanks a lot for any help or advice.
-S
'85 GPz-550
Shrieks
under CVC 21658(A) which is:
Laned Roadways
21658. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more
clearly marked lanes for traffic in one direction, the following rules
apply:
(a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely
within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until such
movement can be made with reasonable safety.
So I guess he got me for not sticking to a particular lane. It'll come
down to his word vs. mine and Bowers is narrow enough that he can
claim that it's impossible to ride between cars without crossing the
lane line a lot. "As nearly as practical", hmmm.
-S
Shrieks <sri...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
: A warning to you folks out there.
: I got ticketed this morning around 9 a.m. on Bowers Ave. in Santa
: Clara for lane-splitting. The ticket calls it "lane straddling". I
: asked the good officer, a moto cop, BTW, whether there was a law
: against what I had done and he basically said there were four things
: that covered it:
...
Jason O'Rourke
>So I guess he got me for not sticking to a particular lane. It'll come
>down to his word vs. mine and Bowers is narrow enough that he can
>claim that it's impossible to ride between cars without crossing the
>lane line a lot. "As nearly as practical", hmmm.
this begs the question of why he, a bike cop, cared. He knows as well as
the rest of us that lane splitting within the letter of the law is less
safe. When I see an officer, I stick to one side and ride in a line that
would probably be straight a mile long, but it certainly isn't idea, nor
done by them either.
--
Jason O'Rourke j...@best.com www.jor.com
'96 BMW r850R
last dive: May 2nd, South Monastery Beach, 54 mins at 32ft max
Denise Howard
> (a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely
> within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until such
> movement can be made with reasonable safety.
>
> down to his word vs. mine and Bowers is narrow enough that he can
> claim that it's impossible to ride between cars without crossing the
> lane line a lot. "As nearly as practical", hmmm.
This particular section seems to be wide open to interpretation. When I
lane-split on Willow Rd. in Menlo Park headed toward the Dumbarton,
traffic is at a standstill but some vehicles in the left lane are a little
far to the right, and some vehicles in the right lane are a little far to
the left. So to safely navigate between, I sometimes have to drift to one
lane, sometimes to the other. Sounds like I could be nailed for
"weaving", even though this _is_ the only safe manner to do it. What
gives?
Denise
'91 Nighthawk 750
'95 CBR600 F3
Bob Gorman
matter. This is what I would do based on what you presented.
The vehicle code does not say that you can not change lanes it says you
must do it with reasonable safety. If the officer shows up in court he
really needs to prove that were riding in an unsafe manner. However, the
reality is if you can politely address the issue of safety with the judge
and tell him that you were taking precautions and that when you did change
lanes you did it with reasonable safety you may have a chance. Also, I am
sure that the officer took notes after he had a little talk with you. What
you said to him will have an impact on what he tells the judge. If you
admitted to him that you were in any way acting unsafe or potentially
unsafe it will hurt your case.
Shrieks <sri...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
: A follow-up to this from my own digging. My ticket says I was nailed
: under CVC 21658(A) which is:
: Laned Roadways
: 21658. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more
: clearly marked lanes for traffic in one direction, the following rules
: apply:
: (a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely
: within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until such
: movement can be made with reasonable safety.
: So I guess he got me for not sticking to a particular lane. It'll come
: down to his word vs. mine and Bowers is narrow enough that he can
: claim that it's impossible to ride between cars without crossing the
: lane line a lot. "As nearly as practical", hmmm.
: -S
: Shrieks <sri...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
: : A warning to you folks out there.
: : I got ticketed this morning around 9 a.m. on Bowers Ave. in Santa
: : Clara for lane-splitting. The ticket calls it "lane straddling". I
: : asked the good officer, a moto cop, BTW, whether there was a law
: : against what I had done and he basically said there were four things
: : that covered it:
: ...
--
------
Karl Riedlinger / August Iron
if you are doing something "out of the ordinary" like lane splitting, you
are gonna get a ticket. cool cop or not. A really cool cop would have
explained the infraction as you requested and acknowledged the vagueness and
generally misunderstood rules applying to this infraction and sent you on
your way with a warning and the info you needed. But I guess cops think we
have all been pulled over and been given warnings a dozen or so times
already, so our time is up.
As I understand it, you can NEVER AT ANY TIME lane split cars. The fact that
we do it so much and get away with it does not make it legal or even
overlooked. Personally, I say go ahead and do it (I used to commute from SF
to Palo Alto on my F3 and wound up lane splitting about 10-20 miles each way
every day!), but be aware that certain areas are more accepting of it . ie:
San Francisco versus beautiful well scrubbed downtown Palo Alto (or Santa
Clara).
Any CHP or municipal officers out there got a word of advice?
Shrieks wrote in message <3741b5f2$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
>A warning to you folks out there.
>
>I got ticketed this morning around 9 a.m. on Bowers Ave. in Santa
>Clara for lane-splitting. The ticket calls it "lane straddling". I
>asked the good officer, a moto cop, BTW, whether there was a law
>against what I had done and he basically said there were four things
>that covered it:
>
Jason O'Rourke
>As I understand it, you can NEVER AT ANY TIME lane split cars. The fact that
a more correct statement would be you can never lane split cars in front
of a motorcycle officer that doesn't want you to. As the poster has
discovered, they have many different sticks to hit you with on the matter.
But lanesplitting itself is quite legal. And sedans can't catch up with
you to voice their objections.
pablo
>.., but be aware that certain areas are more accepting of it . ie:
> San Francisco versus beautiful well scrubbed downtown Palo Alto (or Santa
> Clara).
True that. Santa Clara, particularly, is like something out of a George
Orwell novel for motorcyclists. They're really watching close. They
should just put up signs: morotcycles unwanted. I sometimes ride through
Santa Clara as a shortcut to work. I have been pulled over often, and
for very questionable reasons. There's always been cars that were *far*
faster than me around me (how else do you explain that you get away at a
traffic light, and then cars catch up quickly, officer?), yet the
motorcycle gets stopped, usually whe you exit Santa Clara again. Odd
stuff.
It's crap like this that makes me think the police doesn't deserve us to
be so freaking law-abiding. I see cars doing 75 mph on San Tomas every
other day. Let me try that, and you bet I'd be in trouble real quickly.
Every they motion us to stop, in an act of civil protest we should
simply get away and do something *really* illegal, so at least there's a
justification to pester us later on. "I just did that so I felt you
really had something to stop me for, offucker uh officer". You people
start the revolution, though, I'll join later!
...pablo
Steve Hood
the guy wont show in court. If there gonna give you a bull**** ticket
make em earn the money.Clog up the courts with there own stupid quota's.
It'll cost them court time and the officers pay. If found guilty and I
mean IF then you pay the ticket. Dont make it easy for them. There not
doing you any favors. There revenue'rs. Doing some miss guided idiots
dirty work.Harassing motorcyclists SHEESH...
How many of OUR TAX DOLLARS are being spent on that ???
Of course I guess its better than solving REAL CRIMES !!!!!!!!!
Idiots
>
Roque Torres
The cop is wrong. He basically cited you for a vehicle code section that
pertains to the changing of lanes. Basically, he cited you for an "Unsafe
lane change". That section 21658 (a) is not used often for the sharing of
lanes. It IS legal for two vehcles to share a lane as long as the actions of
both vehicles is legal and safe. Such as:
Two vehicles in the right hand lane. One making a right turn and the other
going straight. A bicycle and a car sharing a lane. If the bicycle is going
straight, it can use the left side of the lane and cars may pass on the
right when turning right or going straight.
The officer must *establish* that you were making *unsafe* lane changes that
were unsafely affecting other traffic. If the cars were stopped, then how in
the world was it unsafe unless you were clipping them? He was basically
saying that using both lanes between cars was unsafe, unreasonable and the
act of changing lanes affected the travel of other traffic. Were you?
Under section 22350 (unsafe speed for conditions) the officer must prove
that you were traveling at a speed that was unsafe for the conditions. This
section is used most often for accidents or people speeding below 55 mph
(schools zone's etc..). Was 15 mph between cars unsafe. I somehow doubt it
unless the space between cars we very slim. There are many more applicable
sections other than this one when it comes to speed. Once again it comes
down to unsafe and unreasonable speed with regard to traffic, road and
conditions. Was this unreasonable?
Passing on the right can only be cited if the action was unsafe or goes
against the signs or signals on the road and roadway. In this case, you were
passing on the right of one lane and the left of another but that's how the
lanes work! When in the left lane, you will pass cars on the left. In the
right lane you will pass cars on the right. That's what you're supposed to
do. Passing on the right shoulder is illegal, or passing on the right while
driving on the sidewalk is unsafe but you *can* pass safely on the right as
long as you're going straight and it's safe (don't do it for a long time).
You best be making a right hand turn somewhere up ahead soon though. Passing
on the right just to gain an advantage at an intersection can place you in a
precarious position if someone ahead of you is making a right turn or you're
going straight at an intersection. You can't go straight from the far right
when both lanes are being occupied by cars. It can be unsafe if someone is
making a right turn. In this case, is it unsafe to drive in the right lane
while passing cars that are stopped in the left lane? Isn't that what you're
supposed to do?
Bikes sharing the road with each other but not a car????? There are specific
laws that regulate certain types of vehicles. In this case the rules of the
road regulate the travel of pedestrian, bicycle and *motor* vehicles. The
specific laws for *types* of vehicles apply to that of required equipment
such as lights and such. There are some moving violations that apply to
certain vehicles such as trucks going 55 and motorcycles allowed in high
occupancy vehicle lanes but NONE of the laws that this officers cited has
specific sections that differentiate between motorcycles and cars.
Two cars can share a lane.
Two motorcycls can share a lane.
Three motorcycles can share a lane.
Etc...etc....
Randy Mamola fought this ticket all the way up to the superior courts a few
years back. It was tough.
KEY!! Lane splitting on freeways is seen as "Not illegal" and not unsafe as
it has no intersections. Lane splitting on surface streets is another
matter. You will lane split up to an intersection and suddenly there will be
three vehicles trying to go straight where there are only two lanes.
Roq
Dick Brewster wrote in message ...
>In article <3741b5f2$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
>sri...@shell5.ba.best.com says...
>> A warning to you folks out there.
>>
>> I got ticketed this morning around 9 a.m. on Bowers Ave. in Santa
>> Clara for lane-splitting. The ticket calls it "lane straddling". I
>> asked the good officer, a moto cop, BTW, whether there was a law
>> against what I had done and he basically said there were four things
>> that covered it:
>>
>> 1. Driving at an unsafe speed for traffic conditions. Traffic was at a
>> completely standstill and he says I was doing around 15.
>
>That's his judgement, the vehicle code doesn't cover this. 15
>mph over traffic speed is not unreasonable
>>
>> 2. Weaving between lanes or not sticking to one lane.
>
>This is probably what he tagged you for.
>
>> 3. Passing on the right.
>
>How many lanes of traffic were there? If you were between two
>lanes going the same direction he was wrong.
>
>>
>> 4. Sharing a lane with a car. Apparently two bikes can share a lane,
>> but not a car and a bike. This was a new one for me.
>
>He was wrong.
>
>> Anyone know what sections of the traffic code I should be looking at
>> for this? Would the DMV website have traffic regulations online?
>>
>> I don't intend to fight this given that the officer was polite, a moto
>> cop himself, he probably has better stuff to do than show up in court
>> etc., but I figure I should know exactly what I can and can't do given
>> there's some vagueness about all this. And I know what to do to avoid
>> another wasted day in traffic school.
>>
>> Thanks a lot for any help or advice.
>>
>> -S
>> '85 GPz-550
>>
>
>You need to be charged with a specific violation of the
>vehicle code or some law. Doesn't the ticket have a CVC code
>number on it?
>
>If after reading the code you still think you were riding legally
>and safely, then you should fight it, hell, it's your duty to
>fight it. That's why they have the police -and- courts. If cops
>were always right and always honest, we wouldn't need courts.
>
>
>The vehicle code is at:
>
>http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html
>
>Dick
>
>--
>username. dbrewste
>domain. ix.netcom.com
Jimmy Stoner
Sprint ST?
Thanks, Jim
---
Jimmy Stoner | ARPA/Internet: jimmy....@EBay.Sun.COM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin C. Cohen
the chance to go to traffic school. I'm not sure exactly how it works,
but I was always under the impression that if you were found guilty in
court that was it. This is the best I could come up with from the
vehicle code. I think the "In lieu of ... and with consent ..." is
what most of as traffic school. The judge can fine you, issue points
against your license, and STILL order you to traffic school if (s)he
feels like it.
"42005. (a) The court may order any person convicted of a traffic
violation to attend a traffic violator school licensed pursuant to
Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 11200) of Division 5.
(b) In lieu of adjudicating a traffic offense, and with the
consent of the defendant, or after conviction of a traffic offense,
the court may order any person issued a notice to appear for a
traffic violation to attend a traffic violator school licensed
pursuant to Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 11200) of Division
5."
Shrieks wrote:
> o I should take the ticket to court and plead not guilty.
> o I should focus on the "reasonable safety" aspect of the CVC statute
> on the ticket and claim that in my opinion what I did was safe.
> o If all this fails, I should suck it up, go to traffic school and
> incite you all to mass revolt against the SCPD :-).
--
"The end of the second millennium and the beginning of the third
will be reached on January 1, 2001. ... Rather than starting with
the year zero, years in this calendar begin with the date
January 1, 1 Anno Domini (AD). Consequently, the next millennium
does not begin until January 1, 2001 AD."
United States Naval Observatory
http://psyche.usno.navy.mil/millennium/whenIs.html
pablo
> .. I guess I don't
> agree with your viewpoint on them [Santa Clara Police] selectively disliking motorcycles.
In the South Bay, among all the people I know, Santa Clara has a
reputation for not messing around. Once I was stopped by a cop that just
gave me a weak warning, but asked me a lot about BMWs and how I liked
the bike yaddadadda. He was about to transfer to the CHP and ride bikes,
he told me. It's like "did you have to go for the blue light routine for
this little conversation?". He was nice, though, even though the alleged
speeding he wanted to charge me with was total BS.
> Perhaps it was just you? :-)
I truly think the big "Pablo" and Colombian flag on the back of my
helmet does not help.
> |I see cars doing 75 mph on San Tomas every
> |other day.
>
> That might even be me. On the bike or in the Viper... And, in my
> experience,They'll pull over either one equally quickly, IF THEY SEE YOU.
On San Tomas, I agree. San Tomas is safe 'cause they have no places to
hide, though. A Viper? Are you the guy I smoked coming off a traffic
light? :-) Just kidding.
...pablo
Randy Davis
|True that. Santa Clara, particularly, is like something out of a George
|Orwell novel for motorcyclists. They're really watching close. They
|should just put up signs: morotcycles unwanted. I sometimes ride through
|Santa Clara as a shortcut to work.
Hmm.. I lived in Santa Clara for four years, commuting on the bike
probably 50% of the time, and was only pulled over once (by a CHP), for
something I clearly *did* do, and let off with a warning. I guess I don't
agree with your viewpoint on them selectively disliking motorcycles.
Perhaps it was just you? :-)
|I see cars doing 75 mph on San Tomas every
|other day.
That might even be me. On the bike or in the Viper... And, in my
experience,They'll pull over either one equally quickly, IF THEY SEE YOU.
Randy Davis
DoD #0013
(to mail, replace nospam with randy)
"But, this one goes to *eleven*!" - Nigel Tufnel, _Spinal Tap_ (paraphrased)
Shrieks
Thanks a ton for the outpuring of support and advice.
The collective wisdom I've received appears to indicate that:
o I should take the ticket to court and plead not guilty.
o I should focus on the "reasonable safety" aspect of the CVC statute
on the ticket and claim that in my opinion what I did was safe.
o If all this fails, I should suck it up, go to traffic school and
incite you all to mass revolt against the SCPD :-).
Some more facts on the deal:
* As far as I recall I didn't tell the cop anything he can use against
me. I merely asked him what exactly I had violated or what law I had
broken and he gave me the list of four things I sent out to you guys.
* I asked him if I could go to traffic school for this and he said yes.
* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
people.
* Traffic was at a complete standstill. It says on the ticket too.
* I didn't cross any intersections while splitting, if this is any
help for my case. He pulled me over at the next intersection, by
which time I was well within my lane and was preparing to turn
right. I had a dental appointment at a dentist whose offices are at
that very intersection. (No I wasn't late for the appointment, just
pissed at being in a parking lot on the road, didn't even mention
the dentist to the cop)
-S
Shrieks <sri...@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:
: A warning to you folks out there.
: I got ticketed this morning around 9 a.m. on Bowers Ave. in Santa
: Clara for lane-splitting. The ticket calls it "lane straddling". I
: asked the good officer, a moto cop, BTW, whether there was a law
: against what I had done and he basically said there were four things
: that covered it:
....
James de'Armond
Boy, these are all new to me.
There are no quota's, the tax dollars pay the officers and courts and
usually cops get paid overtime to show up in court (they love overtime), and
there are plenty of "REAL CRIMES" that take place on the roadways. Enough
accidents take place so that traffic cops are a must.
So Steve, what'll happen when you remove traffic cops and when there's
bedlam on the roads what's your solution?
Roq
Steve Hood wrote in message <3741FC7B...@value.net>...
Larry I. Wallerstein
In <7hsure$8q$1...@ebaynews1.EBay.Sun.COM> ji...@stoner.ebay.sun.com
Mark ?? ;-)
Shrieks wrote in message <37421196$0$2...@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
>
I also think you should take the ticket to court...if everyone just pays
tickets, the cops will keep writing them. If you fight, maybe the cops will
ticket those truly deserving tickets...anyway..
>
>Some more facts on the deal:
>* As far as I recall I didn't tell the cop anything he can use against
> me. I merely asked him what exactly I had violated or what law I had
> broken and he gave me the list of four things I sent out to you guys.
My only advice. Go to the court and after you plead not guilty, go down to
the clerk and get a photo copy of both sides of the officers ticket.
Officers often write thier notes on the back of the ticket, and it helps to
be prepared. The last ticket I fought---(similar situation..only I was
sited for going straight from a turn lane..pure BS)---I asked for copies of
both sides of the ticket and the clerk told me nothing was on the back, so I
didn't get a copy. In court, the judge asked the officer how she remembered
all the details and she told him she wrote it all on the back of the ticket.
I wish I had the photo copy of the blank back of the ticket...might have
just won me that case. Fight Fight Fight...worst case you still lose
money...best case, you help win rights for motorcyle riders. Good luck.
>* I asked him if I could go to traffic school for this and he said yes.
Wait until the judge finds you guilty, then ask to go to traffic school.
>* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
> door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
> tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
> action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
> people.
Clearly a judgement call. The judge will have to determine if it was
unsafe. Your job is to show the judge that your actions were safe.
George Kyriazis
Mark ?? ;-) <supl...@Xpacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>Some more facts on the deal:
>>* As far as I recall I didn't tell the cop anything he can use against
>> me. I merely asked him what exactly I had violated or what law I had
>> broken and he gave me the list of four things I sent out to you guys.
>
>My only advice. Go to the court and after you plead not guilty, go down to
>the clerk and get a photo copy of both sides of the officers ticket.
>Officers often write thier notes on the back of the ticket, and it helps to
>be prepared. The last ticket I fought---(similar situation..only I was
>sited for going straight from a turn lane..pure BS)---I asked for copies of
>both sides of the ticket and the clerk told me nothing was on the back, so I
>didn't get a copy. In court, the judge asked the officer how she remembered
>all the details and she told him she wrote it all on the back of the ticket.
>I wish I had the photo copy of the blank back of the ticket...might have
>just won me that case. Fight Fight Fight...worst case you still lose
>money...best case, you help win rights for motorcyle riders. Good luck.
>
There is an interesting section of the CVC:
40505. Whenever any traffic or police officer delivers a notice to
appear or notice of violation charging an offense under this code to
any person, it shall include all information set forth upon the copy
of the notice filed with a magistrate and no traffic or police
officer shall set forth on any notice filed with a magistrate or
attach thereto or accompany the notice with any written statement
giving information or containing allegations which have not been
delivered to the person receiving the notice to appear or notice of
violation.
I read that as follows:
If an officer writes stuff on the back of the ticket, and gives it to
the courthouse, then he/she must also give the person who got that ticket
that information.
If this is the case, then in the above example, the officer should not
be able to say that they wrote info in the back of the ticket, AND not
give that information to the person with the ticket.
>>* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
>> door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
>> tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
>> action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
>> people.
>
>Clearly a judgement call. The judge will have to determine if it was
>unsafe. Your job is to show the judge that your actions were safe.
>
Wouldn't it be "vehicular assault" if someone opens the car door right
in front of the path of the bike?
--george
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Kyriazis | Silicon Graphics, Inc., 8U-590 | kyri...@sgi.com
| 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd. | 650-933-2828
| Mt. View, CA 94043 |
James de'Armond
same application and screening process as anyone else. Once (if) accepted
then they get to go through the academy the same as anyone else. Just some
information.
Roq
pablo wrote in message <37423677...@samerica.com>...
>Randy Davis wrote:
>
>> .. I guess I don't
>> agree with your viewpoint on them [Santa Clara Police] selectively
disliking motorcycles.
>
>In the South Bay, among all the people I know, Santa Clara has a
>reputation for not messing around. Once I was stopped by a cop that just
>gave me a weak warning, but asked me a lot about BMWs and how I liked
>the bike yaddadadda. He was about to transfer to the CHP and ride bikes,
>he told me. It's like "did you have to go for the blue light routine for
>this little conversation?". He was nice, though, even though the alleged
>speeding he wanted to charge me with was total BS.
>
>> Perhaps it was just you? :-)
>
>I truly think the big "Pablo" and Colombian flag on the back of my
>helmet does not help.
>
>> |I see cars doing 75 mph on San Tomas every
>> |other day.
>>
>> That might even be me. On the bike or in the Viper... And, in my
>> experience,They'll pull over either one equally quickly, IF THEY SEE YOU.
>
Jason O'Rourke
>There are no quota's, the tax dollars pay the officers and courts and
>usually cops get paid overtime to show up in court (they love overtime), and
>there are plenty of "REAL CRIMES" that take place on the roadways. Enough
>accidents take place so that traffic cops are a must.
Roq - you sure you want to defend the notion that there aren't quotas? It
was only last year or so that one penisula city came under fire for
remarks about the minimum requirements from each officer.
Jason O'Rourke
>* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
> door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
> tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
> action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
> people.
It will be interesting to see if he wrote this conversation down in his
notes. The CVC clearly states that the driver is responsible for opening
the door safely. I can't think of any justification to open the door in
stalled traffic that gets around this.
As others allude, you can get these notes. He doesn't have to give it to
you however, you must request it. Fight Your Ticket has the proceedure.
If they do not comply within 15 days, you have grounds for dismissal,
though the judge may choose to continue the trial and give them time to
cough it up.
>* Traffic was at a complete standstill. It says on the ticket too.
Combined with what Roq said, that may be your ticket out of this thing.
Hosmann95
>>accidents take place so that traffic cops are a must.
What percentage of accidents take place on the freeways where the police
apparently spend 90% of their time? My guess is that freeways have the lowest
accident rates of any type of road.
I would argue that the cops spend the majority of their time handing out
speeding tickets on freeways because this is the easiest revenue generating
techniqe available.
To be fair, I would say the CHP has a much different relationship with
motorists in CA than in any other state I've seen. In four years living here,
I've never seen a cop hiding behind a bush with a radar gun like I've seen in
Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, Arizona, Pennsylvania (the worst), or New York.
Did you know that Pennsylvania STILL sticks to a 55 mph speed limit on rural
freeways (at least they did the last time I was there). They post the fines on
billboards every few miles, with the fine increasing exponentially with EVERY
MILE PER HOUR over 55 that you go.
James de'Armond
The CHP is responsible for traffic enforcment and accident investigation. If
an officer has all of his/her paperwork caught up then they start enforcing
the laws they've been asked to enforce. Those laws usually pertain to
equipment or moving violations. If they don't do that then they're not doing
their job and the roads turn to bedlam worse than they already are.
Roq
Jason O'Rourke <j...@best.com> wrote in message
news:7hv78b$bd6$1...@shell9.ba.best.com...
> James de'Armond <dear...@slip.net> wrote:
> >There are no quota's, the tax dollars pay the officers and courts and
> >usually cops get paid overtime to show up in court (they love overtime),
and
> >there are plenty of "REAL CRIMES" that take place on the roadways. Enough
> >accidents take place so that traffic cops are a must.
>
> Roq - you sure you want to defend the notion that there aren't quotas? It
> was only last year or so that one penisula city came under fire for
> remarks about the minimum requirements from each officer.
Randy Davis
|Randy Davis wrote:
|> Perhaps it was just you? :-)
|
|I truly think the big "Pablo" and Colombian flag on the back of my
|helmet does not help.
:-) Perhaps that might be why you might gain extra attention. I wear
simple black leather. I don't necessarily blend in (and have some
reflective stuff also, as well as some black reflective tape on my
helmet), but I don't tend to gain a lot of attention, either. Stock
pipe on the ZX-11, and I don't have to give it much gas in town to
get my acceleration jollies and still not gain too much attention.
|> That might even be me. On the bike or in the Viper... And, in my
|> experience,They'll pull over either one equally quickly, IF THEY SEE YOU.
|
|On San Tomas, I agree. San Tomas is safe 'cause they have no places to
|hide, though. A Viper? Are you the guy I smoked coming off a traffic
|light? :-) Just kidding.
Unlikely - not because you couldn't, but more because I doubt if I'd try
too hard (depending on what you were riding, of course). I did have some
nimrod on an old clapped-out 500-something think he could out-accelerate
the cage, and I educated him to reality one time (totally empty street and
fairly safe). But, despite a 0-60 in 4.6 seconds, many bikes can beat
this. (I had to educate one or two Viper owner friends to this with the
bike. :-)
Gregory d'Orso
On 19 May 1999, Hosmann95 wrote:
> To be fair, I would say the CHP has a much different relationship with
> motorists in CA than in any other state I've seen. In four years living here,
> I've never seen a cop hiding behind a bush with a radar gun like I've seen in
> Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, Arizona, Pennsylvania (the worst), or New York.
I saw it no longer than a couple of weeks ago. On 85 between
Cupertino and Mountain View. Hiding behind a bush... hehe...
Seen it multiple times on Central Expw too.
-- Greg
_____________________________________________________________
Gregory d'Orso do...@bok.net
Denise Howard
> I saw it no longer than a couple of weeks ago. On 85 between
> Cupertino and Mountain View. Hiding behind a bush... hehe...
??? Where are there any hiding bushes along that oh-so-barren road? I
need to know....
Karl Riedlinger / August Iron
who is Roque Torres?
I got my information from the SFPD who had me pulled over a few years ago
with a string of infractions some factual some "creative".
not the he was an authority on the MV code, but...
at least he didn't show at the trial : )
the reason I stated I believe lane splitting or sharing is not allowed is
precisely the reason the author of the origional post got his ticket.
^the cop didn't like what he (the rider) was doing and morphed some
sections of the code to cite the rider "unsafe lane change" "unsafe manuver"
"transporting nuclear warheads without a permit" whatever they want to call
it. it is your word against the police. good luck. I have won some of those
and lost some as well.
the vehicle code and the justice system to enforce it are based on human
judgement, usually the police's. you are left to disprove whatever you are
accused of.
that is all.
PlanetKarl>>out
Marchant, Jon A. wrote in message <37428144...@news.marinternet.com>...
>On Tue, 18 May 1999 12:17:23 -0700, "Karl Riedlinger / August Iron"
><augus...@pathlink.com> sez:
>>
>>As I understand it, you can NEVER AT ANY TIME lane split cars.
>
>You understand it wrong.
>
>>The fact that
>>we do it so much and get away with it does not make it legal or even
>>overlooked.
>
>No, what makes it legal is that it is not prohibited anywhere in the
>vehicle code.
>>
>>Any CHP or municipal officers out there got a word of advice?
>
>I wonder what group you've been reading. In the one I'm reading I've
>seen several comments from Roque Torres. Don't his comments count?
>
>--
>Jon Marchant -
>(take one "in" out of address to reply)
Gregory d'Orso
On 20 May 1999, Denise Howard wrote:
> Gregory d'Orso <do...@bok.net> wrote:
> > I saw it no longer than a couple of weeks ago. On 85 between
> > Cupertino and Mountain View. Hiding behind a bush... hehe...
>
> ??? Where are there any hiding bushes along that oh-so-barren road? I
> need to know....
Right after the 85/280... Take 85 towards Mountain View (towards
85 -> 101). On your right hand side, there is a "gate" that you
discover pretty much at the last moment... Agreed, the term
"bush" may not be very appropriate... as it's not really "bushy"
but it's a somewhat cool place to hide :-)
Reverend Tweek
>
>* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
> door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
> tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
> action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
> people.
Hit DeJaNews in this newsgroup for a thread which occured several
years ago on what resulted when some stupid Contra Costa Times
columnist (Joan <somethingorother>) suggested opening the door on lane
splitting motorcyclists. From that point, you can get a date of the
article and rebuttals, (and I believe one of those rebutals published
in the times was either from a DMV or CHP spokesperson) and find the
actual edition of the paper which the semi-official word was published
that it is infact legal.
Hell, with this arguement that it's unsafe because someone *might*
door you, driving a car on the freeway is unsafe because a plane
might come falling down out of the sky onto your car... therefor driving
is illegal.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Had your share of stoopid(tm) people? | |
| View the "Contra Costa Whines" at | [This space for lease] |
| http://www.io.com/~tweek/cocowhine/ | |
Denise Howard
> Right after the 85/280... Take 85 towards Mountain View (towards
> 85 -> 101). On your right hand side, there is a "gate" that you
> discover pretty much at the last moment... Agreed, the term
> "bush" may not be very appropriate... as it's not really "bushy"
> but it's a somewhat cool place to hide :-)
Ah. Thanks for pointing this out. I've never noticed this--it's probably
right in the area where I'm looking the other way, trying to work my way
over to the fast lane. I'll be more on the lookout from now on!
James de'Armond
why many people in the newsgroup respect his opinion about the legal issues
of driving a motorcycle in California). He's also a pretty decent motorcycle
racer.
James de'Armond (Roq's older, more handsome, brother)
jdea...@home.com
www.homeofficecenter.com
510-559-8288
Karl Riedlinger / August Iron <augus...@pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:7i0i2j$4...@enews4.newsguy.com...
bj...@my-dejanews.com
I was late to work, splitting 2 lanes that entered on to 87 north in SJ.
Probably a couple hundred yards of backed up traffic in two lanes moving
along a city street then through a left turn, up a fairly steep freeway
ramp with the two lanes metered at the top. (It really sucks in a car)
The cagers were being unusually uncoorperative that morning so I
aggressively split lanes to the red light at the left turn. hehehe
I then noticed, sitting at the top of the ramp, 4 of San Jose's finest,
sitting on and around their KZ1000 police specials obviously ticketing
my fellow commuters for improper line etiquette and all 4 were
smiling at me. boohoohoo
I wished I had remained in bed. Being one that accepts responsibilities
for his actions, and knowing I need to use this ramp everyday, I decided
not to run. The light turned green and I started inching up the heavily
congested ramp, in line, as inconspicuously as impossible. It's really
hard to stop and go up hill, and impossible to do it quietly with a
vance&hines pipe that should've been repacked 4 years ago. I dreaded
seeing my neighbors wave as I took my punishment at the top of the ramp.
As I got even with the 4, they smiled, laughed and yelled "go ahead
and split". And so I did, and it was good.
Brian
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Joel Garry
<tw...@netcom-NO.SPAM-com> wrote:
>Shrieks <sri...@nospam.best.com> wrote:
>>
>>* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
>> door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
>> tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
>> action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
>> people.
>
>Hit DeJaNews in this newsgroup for a thread which occured several
>years ago on what resulted when some stupid Contra Costa Times
>columnist (Joan <somethingorother>) suggested opening the door on lane
>splitting motorcyclists. From that point, you can get a date of the
>article and rebuttals, (and I believe one of those rebutals published
>in the times was either from a DMV or CHP spokesperson) and find the
>actual edition of the paper which the semi-official word was published
>that it is infact legal.
>
>Hell, with this arguement that it's unsafe because someone *might*
>door you, driving a car on the freeway is unsafe because a plane
>might come falling down out of the sky onto your car... therefor driving
>is illegal.
I know someone who was doored, don't know anyone hit by a plane while
driving (although I was a bit nervous watching those Cobras through
my sunroof when those type helicopters were ocassionally becoming
rocklike).
jg
--
These opinions are my own.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/joel_garry Remove nospam to reply.
mailto:joel-...@nospam.home.com Oracle and unix guy.
JeffT
>Hit DeJaNews in this newsgroup for a thread which occured several
>years ago on what resulted when some stupid Contra Costa Times
>columnist (Joan <somethingorother>) suggested opening the door on lane
>splitting motorcyclists. From that point, you can get a date of the
>article and rebuttals, (and I believe one of those rebutals published
>in the times was either from a DMV or CHP spokesperson) and find the
>actual edition of the paper which the semi-official word was published
>that it is infact legal.
I tried to search for this in DejaNews, and couldn't find it. This would be
an excellent article to have on file... do you have any other information
that may help in finding it, perchance? Anyone?
Jeff
Reverend Tweek
>
>I tried to search for this in DejaNews, and couldn't find it. This would be
>an excellent article to have on file... do you have any other information
>that may help in finding it, perchance? Anyone?
Damn! It isn't there. I just ran DeJaNews inside out trying to find
hide or hair of it, and couldn't. IIRC, I believe Mike Felder even
made a comment on it when it happened. Had to have been about three or
four years ago... and I believe the full name of the columnist may have
been Joan Morris.
Jason O'Rourke
>Damn! It isn't there. I just ran DeJaNews inside out trying to find
>hide or hair of it, and couldn't. IIRC, I believe Mike Felder even
>made a comment on it when it happened. Had to have been about three or
>four years ago... and I believe the full name of the columnist may have
>been Joan Morris.
I thought it was San Jose Merc, myself. In any event, I remember the
event and I think it predates dejanews (1995).
John Prelock
for splitting on the Bay Bridge, that's vc22350, unsafe speed, 30-50mph
in his opinion. The venue was Oakland. The officer showed and we went
to trial. He took the stand and gave a detailed account of the
incident. I then questioned him about my actions and if they caused
anyone to brake, speed up or swerve out of the way. He said he wasn't
really paying attention to the cars around me but he didn't think so. I
made some statements to the effect that if I wasn't affecting anyone
around me so I was not doing anything unsafe. The officer rebutted
saying that he had seen many accidents on the bridge and gave anecdotal
evidence about how other drivers react. I rebutted that saying we
aren't trying any other accidents, just the incident in question, and
that I still was not doing anything unsafe. That rebuttal was not
strong enough since I was then found guilty. The judge said the case
was well presented by both sides and he had to think about all the
aspects being brought before him. In the end, he said, he was
personally biased against motorcycles being a car driver himself and has
had motorcycles pass him when he wanted to turn into that space, and
though has never been in an accident, felt that the occurrence was
unsafe. He went on to say that, being a judge, he is not allowed to use
personal bias in his rulings unless the thought in question was brought
into evidence. He said that the officer, in his rebuttal, brought up
the reaction of the driver of the car in such an instance, thus he could
use his own bias to rule. The judge was seeming to say that if the
officer had not brought up that point, he may have found in my favor.
Without my asking the judge reduced the fine, presumably because he felt
the case was well argued, and found me guilty, saying that perhaps this
could be a wake up call for me. That is the first point on my record in
years, believe it or not.
John Prelock (AFM#357)
93 CBR600F2
89 EX250
James de'Armond
Just a thought.
Roq
John Prelock <jpre...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:37460D0B...@earthlink.net...
James de'Armond
tickets as part of their job. There's no required minimum or maximum
quota's. The officer is either enforcing or not. The issue here is that an
officer might "get into trouble" if he/she doesn't reach a minimum "quota".
That's a myth that people choose to believe. An officer can write as many
tickets as he feels like writing. Most of those citations will be targeted
toward those actions that cause most of the accidents on the road; Within
the officers control of course. Why a person swerves, speeds, changes lanes
unsafely, or follows too close can't always be addressed but the action
itself can be cited. Most of the accidents I've seen were caused by unsafe
speed, unsafe turning, DUI and most of those had an associated or implied
factor of innatention.
Affirmative action. Did you know that some CHP officers don't write *any*
tickets? Did you know that some of them write so much fewer than others?
Sometimes an officer is so busy writing accident reports that they don't
write hardly any tickets. Seems that your quota myth couldn't possibly apply
to some and not to others? Why would some officers not get into trouble if
they don't have time to write tickets, or if they don't go out on patrol.
Sheesh, I guess they get fired.
Roq
Dick Brewster <addre...@bottom.of.message> wrote in
messnews:MPG.11acee474...@nntp.ix.netcom.com...
> In article <bTG03.2795$fx5....@news.rdc1.sfba.home.com>,
> jdea...@home.com says...
> > I've never seen evidence of a quota. I've looked personally.
> >
> > The CHP is responsible for traffic enforcment and accident
investigation. If
> > an officer has all of his/her paperwork caught up then they start
enforcing
> > the laws they've been asked to enforce. Those laws usually pertain to
> > equipment or moving violations. If they don't do that then they're not
doing
> > their job and the roads turn to bedlam worse than they already are.
> >
> > Roq
> >
>
> And the evidence that the cop is enforcing the law is the number
> of tickets he writes. Saying that is not a quota is like saying
> affirmative action does not involve quotas. It's just a bunch of
> Orwellian doublespeak.
>
>
> --
> username. dbrewste
> domain. ix.netcom.com
Reverend Tweek
It may well be, since when Knight Ridder bought the Contra Costa Times, they
also got Joan Morris. I saw it in the Times however.
>In any event, I remember the
>event and I think it predates dejanews (1995).
You might have a point there. Was it that long ago? Sheesh!
Larry I. Wallerstein
lane splitting, since I do it, and when I'm in my cage, I wave cyclists
through. I guess that bias would lead to a "not guilty". Your judge
is not supposed to inject his antimotocyclist bias into the case, and
if he is honest enough to admit the bias, he should recuse himself
(remove himself from the case) and give it to someone who can judge
fairly. Was this a real judge, or a volunteer lawyer serving as a
Judge Pro Temp? Care to share the name and the courtroom so we can
challenge him for bias if any of us show up there?
Regards,
Larry
99 Honda F4
In <37460D0B...@earthlink.net> John Prelock
>> I thought it was San Jose Merc, myself. In any event, I remember
the
>> event and I think it predates dejanews (1995).
Jason O'Rourke
>>In any event, I remember the
>>event and I think it predates dejanews (1995).
>
in any event, I've heard others suggest dooring in the years since. They
seem so surprised when I take offense and shove it back down their
throats.
If you hear someone toss out the notion of opening the door, don't go easy
on them. Don't let them think it's ok to even think about it.
"Sometimes I feel an urge to open my door"
"Sometime I feel an urge to bugger your wife/daughter/son/mother"
or if you want to really push it
"Sometimes I feel like lynching a black/gay/asian/volvo driver"
(That should shock them back into reality, or at least indicate that
they'd be better off not saying such things in front of you anymore. The
fantasy of dooring is one of attempted murder. Nothing minor about it.
DirtCrashr
>If you hear someone toss out the notion of opening the door, don't go easy
>on them. Don't let them think it's ok to even think about it.
And not for reasons of their own safety either. Has anybody discussed the
actual results of door-opening for the car-driver?
Isn't it one of a car-driver's original BAD IDEAS, sorta like lighting farts in
a puddle of gasoline?
Aren't they liable to order up a lap-full of hot front tire, brakes and
fork-salad in their car and on their legs?
Isn't it a bit more intimate than they want to discover? It's not the romantic
"door-jousting" they imagine, or quite as might happen with a bicycle.
So I've heard.
DirtCrashr - '97xr400
Joerg Wenzel
-- Article 1 of 1, Article ID: 9601030728
-- Published on 08/26/96, CONTRA COSTA TIMES
-- MOTORCYCLISTS CAN SPLIT TRAFFIC' WHEN FLOW'S STOP-AND-GO
-- Q: "Why can motorcycles cut between traffic lanes? Can they do it just when
the other traffic is going slowly,
or can they also do it at 65 mph or faster on the freeway? That doesn't seem
safe to me." - D.M., Benicia.
-- A: Police call that "splitting traffic," and it's OK if the motorcycle rider
goes slowly through stop-and-go traffic.
I don't trust these guys, but you might print it out and show it the next time
you get stopped (hehehe)
Joerg
Reverend Tweek wrote:
> Shrieks <sri...@nospam.best.com> wrote:
> >
> >* He did say that what I did was unsafe because "someone might open a
> > door" etc. While I appreciate his concern, I don't need the law to
> > tell me what risks I take when I willfully undertake a course of
> > action. At no point did he say that what I did endangered other
> > people.
>
> Hit DeJaNews in this newsgroup for a thread which occured several
> years ago on what resulted when some stupid Contra Costa Times
> columnist (Joan <somethingorother>) suggested opening the door on lane
> splitting motorcyclists. From that point, you can get a date of the
> article and rebuttals, (and I believe one of those rebutals published
> in the times was either from a DMV or CHP spokesperson) and find the
> actual edition of the paper which the semi-official word was published
> that it is infact legal.
--
Spamblock in place: remove NOSPAM in my e-mail address to reply or use
Reverend Tweek
>This is the only article i found so far about 'Lane Splitting'
>
>-- Article 1 of 1, Article ID: 9601030728
>-- Published on 08/26/96, CONTRA COSTA TIMES
>-- MOTORCYCLISTS CAN SPLIT TRAFFIC' WHEN FLOW'S STOP-AND-GO
No. That's not the one. That looks like a Robert Oake's column. He
handles all forms of transportation questions, and uses his brain when
doing so usually.