wombatsauce

iTrader: (7)

Wow... I think the point here isn't that one should or should not cycle while impaired at any level but more that the rules that apply to automobiles should not be the same as those for bicycles.

Cycling is not as complex and demanding as you seem to think it is - shoot, even kids do it every day! It takes a certain level of awareness but there are a few things to consider. One would have to be CONSIDERABLY impaired to hit a pedestrian, cause property damage or damaged someone's car when hitting it. I am not even sure what you would have to do to yourself or a bicycle to cause property damage unless you rode through a window.

What I am saying here is, a car is a (in most cases) near two ton huge object that is capable of seriously high speeds and will not really be stopped by people or small objects. A bike has a propelled usual top speed of what - 20-25 mph but usually it would be closer to 10-12mph. Total weight, reaction time, stopping distances, ability to damage other objects are all greatly reduced. Motorbiking is not even really comparable (in damage potential collateral or otherwise) to cycling.

I would bet in most cases people bike instead of take the car solely because they are thinking of other people. Otherwise they would have just driven.

Anyway, if someone is totally obliterated and riding a bike doing stupid stuff and is obviously dangerous, yeah - damn they should get in trouble. How about a DIP with stiffer penalties and such. But why put the cyclist in the same room with the person who is DUI at a .18 BAC and was doing 110mph down the freeway weaving in and out of cars (with teeny babies and people's loved ones a flick of the wrist away) with the same exact penalties and fines? Because it's the law. No one can argue that - but we can think it's stupid. It's OK if you don't - but I don't think you will change our minds on this one.

Cheers to people having their own opinions!

darkonion

iTrader: (31)

Not this Friday for me. I'll be heading back to the bay. Bubble tonight, I think... but if you guys haven't had any problems, that'd be cool.

johnnysixer

How can they give out B.U.I tickets when you dont need a liscense to ride a bike?!

Vince25RS

iTrader: (3)

Yup

nachomc

iTrader: (7)

Obviously not all laws that apply to automobiles should apply to bicycles, and not all of them do. This one I think should. It makes sense that it would, because many of the same risks (and potential deadly outcomes) exist, just like with running stop signs/lights, etc.

Yeah, and kids crash and get seriously injured all the time from normal riding. Riding on the road safely does take quite a bit of concentration - in my car, I'm considerably more visible to other vehicles, and getting turned in to by a vehicle likely won't even injure me in my car. On my bike though, I could very possibly die from a slow speed accident such as that, even if I'm wearing full safety gear. I started commuting to work by bike last summer when I was able to - trust me, riding safely is a LOT harder than you apparently think.

stevenkhau

iTrader: (11)

what's stupid is if you think you're putting anybody else but yourself in harms way if you're biking drunk. so you kill yourself...great...your own damn fault. but it should be your decision, not the government's. that's why it's stupid.

And if you're so drunk you're hitting pedestrians and causing property damage, what's to say you won't be doing that walking?

Try using some common sense, okay

jvick125

iTrader: (2)

Actually, you're wrong. To become a CHP, one can do so without having gone to college. To be a University Police officer, one must have at least a 4 year degree. So not being able to make it as real cops, I don't think so.

midnitewrx02

iTrader: (9)

bike= more speed than walking= possibility of causing more damage, and more margin for error..if your riding a bike at 15mph and smash into a group of ppl.. that will do more damage than if you walked into a group of ppl..good example? same goes for property

mot

iTrader: (5)

werd...its a tad bit long. i bet it was extremely long for Zoeb cuz he cant read well.

nachomc

iTrader: (7)

Yeah good call. Me walking at 2-3mph (avg) will do the same amount of damage as me riding at 17mph, weighing 225 lbs riding a 21lb object of metals and alloys with sharp pointy bits everywhere . I know you're defending biking under the influence because you're a self-admitted *** hat, but don't try to insult my intelligence by trying to equate potential damage from hitting someone with a bike to bumping in to someone by accident while walking.

Snot Rod

Yeah, and what about the guy in the car that swerved outta the way to avoid you on the bike, and in the process hit an oncoming car head-on?

SSFWRX

iTrader: (10)

all i can say is if im ever in a parking lot with friends doing nothing but talking, and the officer didnt see me drive the vehicle, there is no way they are touching it. They can ask me to remove it from the property...and its gonna leave on a flatbed via AAA to my house. Cause there is no way Im going to get bullied into an illegal search and seizure without just cause, as there were no moving violations broken. Run my ID all you want, but when you start talking about my vehicle thats sitting still, im sorry but you're going to have to take a hike.

Now mcgower is going to say "ok do that fine you're gonna get arrested and deserve it." Problem is I work in a law enforcement job. I'm not a sworn peace officer, but I can sure tell you another officer isnt going to arrest me without due cause. I was recently hassled by San Bruno/Millbrae police in an unmarked. I was in my 1971 Datsun 521 pickup. I was cruising at 1am at 35mph on El Camino. I just got off work, was in uniform covered with jacket and was with my fiancee. I broke no laws. They stopped me and harassed me. I told him his stop was unwarranted. He tells me "usually people who are in law enforcement dont act this way when stopped by other LEO's." My reply "usually traffic stops have just cause." After this they decided they were spinning their wheels, and obviously had nothing to cite me for.

Fast forward one week....my buddy at SBPD says its a "street crimes task force." And they stop every car possible at night for anything they can think of to run warrants, and to run DUI checks. Also says my little 35 year old truck is a "meth mobile." HAHHAHA

chimchimm5

iTrader: (9)

I'm pretty scared because my Trek is running a total turbo back delete exhaust.

But seriously... do you think it would have helped if you stated upfront and plainly, "we're just hanging out trying to have good, clean fun. No we don't race, but we are car enthusiasts. We take it to the track and are thoroughly against street racing. Is there anything else I can help you with officer?"

You've stated your intent, given plausible reasoning for you current actions, and are denying association with what they are profiling you for... and done it all politely. File a complaint about their conduct later if you don't like it. Getting them busted later is going to hurt them a whole lot more than a defiant attitude at that moment. (Not saying you were defiant, but the cuffed friend apparently gave the impression he was... which probably set the bad tone of the incident.)

stevenkhau

iTrader: (11)

Sorry, I'm not trying to insult your intelligence. You're doing a pretty good job of that yourself already.

I'm not talking about the speed. I'm not talking about physics and kinetic energy. If you're drunk enough to be running into **** and causing trouble on a bike, you're equality drunk enough to be causing **** walking on the streets. It simply has to do with the kind of person you are. Being drunk just brings it out...whether you're on a bike or not. You're too narrow-minded to understand my entire point on the use of common sense and the lengths to which the gov't will go to restrict people's freedom based upon their perception of people's lack of common sense. People like you just exacerbate the problem by being sheep.

There are already public intoxication laws for stopping and ticketing people who are acting in a manner dangerous to themselves or others. You don't need an additional law to differentiate between walking and biking when you alreay have one in place to take care of your so-called ***-hattery. People like you are exactly the type of people of approve of the OP's contention of police profiling. Stop being such a sheep and start comprehending the vast scope of the damage your paranoia causes on society in general.

midnitewrx02

iTrader: (9)