Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

iquantny.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 142 posts

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#81

Post by keithpeter »

avn2109 wrote: post #49
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NYPD says they don't even have the resources to investigate fatal car crashes. They didn't bother investigating the death of a three year old girl in a crosswalk this year. The driver didn't even get so much as a ticket. If there's some cop standing around with nothing to do I'm sure they could be assigned to look into the fifty pedestrian injury collisions that happen every day in New York.

>> "If there's some cop standing around with nothing to do..." Honestly, I have (almost) only ever seen NYPD officers standing around with nothing to do. I don't know if that's because they are drastically overmanned or because they intentionally deploy loafing cops for the deterrent effect.

"Walking the beat" in the UK.

It is what uniformed police officers are supposed to do in popular imagination. Many in evidence in most UK cities in the run up to Xmas.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#82

Post by gareim »

Strang wrote: post #72
jff wrote: post #44

I wish all police everywhere started ticketing for more traffic violations. When everyone on the road--cyclist, motorist, and pedestrian--follows the rules precisely, traffic is predictable and safe. When morons wave you through at a 4-way stop, or turn without signaling (yay California), or blow red lights on their bicycle, you have to go into extra-defensive mode because the road is no longer predictable.

I see people complain about waving at a four-way stop all the time, and I really don't get it. I wave people through at four-way stops all the time, for the simple reason that it can be hard to tell who arrived first. Especially with rolling stops and the like. So rather than assume that the other drivers have come to the same conclusion that I have, I make it explicit by waving. Sometimes it's a little confusing if…

I assume they mean when it's clear who arrived first. As a pedestrian, I hate cars waving me through when I clearly get there ~2 seconds after they do.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#83

Post by tzakrajs »

Strang wrote: post #72
jff wrote: post #44

I wish all police everywhere started ticketing for more traffic violations. When everyone on the road--cyclist, motorist, and pedestrian--follows the rules precisely, traffic is predictable and safe. When morons wave you through at a 4-way stop, or turn without signaling (yay California), or blow red lights on their bicycle, you have to go into extra-defensive mode because the road is no longer predictable.

I see people complain about waving at a four-way stop all the time, and I really don't get it. I wave people through at four-way stops all the time, for the simple reason that it can be hard to tell who arrived first. Especially with rolling stops and the like. So rather than assume that the other drivers have come to the same conclusion that I have, I make it explicit by waving. Sometimes it's a little confusing if…

Turn without waiting since the other person is highly likely to wait anyways. Problem solved.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#84

Post by clarry »

genericuser wrote: post #67
clarry wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the colour of a light doesn't make crossing the street unsafe. Even if there are fifty cars waiting at that intersection and a thousand more parked at the next lot.

The drivers that it increases hatred for aren't the parked ones ones, and aren't the ones next to you going the same direction, they are the ones that have to worry about an unexpected cyclist in their path, regardless of if you believe you will be safely out their path by the time they get to where you are. I am sorry but I felt it was obvious I wasn't talking about parked cars.

Actually I'm pretty sure the drivers getting outraged are the ones sitting at a red light doing nothing except waiting and watching and seeing me cross on red. "Oh I saw that asshole run a red light! (HOW UNFAIR!)"

As for the drivers worrying about unexpected cyclists getting in their path.. no, that has nothing to do with the colour of the light. Yes, it may be a concern, just like unexpected cars getting in their path might be a concern. And it has nothing to do with the colour of the light. So it pays to approach an intersection carefully. Because if you drive enough, you may eventually find out that some intersections don't even have lights to begin with, and a car or a cyclist might've misjudged your speed. Yes, even I could make such a mistake and misjudge someone. That's the risk we all take in traffic. Red doesn't mean unsafe. Green doesn't mean the path is clear. What do you do when the light blinks yellow or turns off? What do you do when the light turns green for you and also for the cyclist next to you?

I run reds, but I judge the safety of it just as I would if there were no lights, or as if I were crossing where there's no intersection. And yes I do account for the fact that drivers are not going by the standard yield rules in a light-controlled intersection. I'm not reckless.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#85

Post by kazinator »

What are the consequences of not paying a bicycle ticket in MY, if you don't have a driver's license?

Anyway, the cops should be focused on those who are in tenuous control of two tons of steel, going three times the speed of a bicycle.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#86

Post by shittyanalogy »

I'm going to attempt to rationalize why cyclists don't obey traffic laws in cities.

The short answer is that bicycle riding in cities sucks.

It's loud, slippery, uneven, blocked, takes a lot of physical effort, is full of unpredictable giant metal things that can kill you, teeming with large moving meat pillars that will jump in front of you at any moment, you're completely exposed to the weather and can't safely look at a map while you navigate. They've created a few strips of pot-hole ridden, double parked green pavement that they say is just for you but it's not safe even if you're being safe and extremely uncomfortable. Bicycle riding also happens though to be the fastest, most liberating way to get around and is good exercise so you put up with it, but you put up with it while annoying a few people yourself. You block lanes when you feel like it's safer to do so, cross red lights when you think it's safe so you save some time and so you can stay in front of the same wave of traffic as they already know you're there. Some times you make a bad decision that results in a honk but you've also been splashed, cut-off, bumped, blocked and almost doored and you don't have a horn of your own for when that happens. You're up against a torment of danger and uncomfortable that can kill you and the most you can ever do is make someone annoyed or maybe flip a mirror back. You start to realize that the cards aren't in your favor and that annoying drivers in their crash cages, with AC, maps, surround sound, horns, gas pedals and bucket seats really isn't that big of a deal. You just don't equate your presence on the road with theirs and don't think the same laws should apply. Not because you're magically above the law but because through years of experience you can see that the situations are completely different and require completely different attention. You think to yourself, the day cars weight 40lbs and go 15mph is the day you obey all the same laws as them.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#87

Post by ceejayoz »

jff wrote: post #69
ceejayoz wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For instance, you even see bicycle cops riding their bikes on the wrong side of the street. You know, this one I understand entirely. When I walk on a road without sidewalks, I always walk on the wrong side of the road, so I can see what's coming and whether they're paying attention. Getting mowed down from behind by someone not looking where they're going isn't on my bucket list.

And that's correct--WHEN WALKING. Cyclists are supposed to behave as vehicles, not as pedestrians, so they need to move with traffic.

I'm just saying part of the problem is that cyclists behave as a squishy bag of meat in an accident. Given the prevalence of inattentive motorists, I'm not shocked some folks prefer to risk a ticket.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#89

Post by rcthompson »

Strang wrote: post #72
jff wrote: post #44

I wish all police everywhere started ticketing for more traffic violations. When everyone on the road--cyclist, motorist, and pedestrian--follows the rules precisely, traffic is predictable and safe. When morons wave you through at a 4-way stop, or turn without signaling (yay California), or blow red lights on their bicycle, you have to go into extra-defensive mode because the road is no longer predictable.

I see people complain about waving at a four-way stop all the time, and I really don't get it. I wave people through at four-way stops all the time, for the simple reason that it can be hard to tell who arrived first. Especially with rolling stops and the like. So rather than assume that the other drivers have come to the same conclusion that I have, I make it explicit by waving. Sometimes it's a little confusing if…

No, I think you're talking about a situation where two cars are pulling up to an empty intersection simultaneously. That's a low-traffic situation. The problem comes when you're at a 4-way stop and people are coming from every direction. Anyone who wants to go through the intersection needs the cars from at least two other directions to let them through. So you, as one person, waving them through is pointless because at least one other person would also have to independently decide to let them through as well. If that doesn't happen, then either the other car listens to you and goes through the intersection and crashes into the third person who didn't wave them through, or you and the other car both end up waiting when only one of you needs to be. Either way, you're being rude to the people behind you, whose trip you have lengthened by the same amount you might have shortened someone else's trip, all the while making the intersection less predictable. Of course, there's always a race condition and potential for deadlock when two cars arrive simultaneously at an empty intersection, and waving people through is a safe and necessary way to solve that. But that's not an issue here, because if an intersection already has cars waiting to go from all four directions, there's a defined order in which they take turns according to the rules.

Re: Is the NYPD About to Start Ticketing More Cyclists Due to a Mathematical Error?

#90

Post by jff »

ceejayoz wrote: post #87
jff wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's correct--WHEN WALKING. Cyclists are supposed to behave as vehicles, not as pedestrians, so they need to move with traffic.

I'm just saying part of the problem is that cyclists behave as a squishy bag of meat in an accident . Given the prevalence of inattentive motorists, I'm not shocked some folks prefer to risk a ticket.

Say the speed limit is 30, and you can pedal along at 15 mph.

If you ride with traffic and get hit, your relative speed at collision will be 15 mph and the collision will push you away from the car.

If you ride against traffic and get hit, you're dealing with a head-on collision at 45 mph relative speed.

That's why I always ride with traffic.

Post reply on HN