The reality is: Many people in all levels of law enforcement are basically stupid people. Get over it.. There's really no way to fix it. (This includes police, prosecutors, judges. There's really no way to fix this.)
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:50 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Send Bikies mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Bikies digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: "stop" legally defined (Paul T. O'Leary) > 2. Re: "stop" legally defined (Grant Foster) > 3. Re: "stop" legally defined (Patrick Lenon) > 4. Invitation: Biking to Renewable Energy Fest Custer arriving > June 14, ... @ Thu Jun 14 - Sun Jun 17, 2012 > ([email protected]) (Melanie Foxcroft) > 5. Biking to Renewable Energy Fest (Melanie Foxcroft) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 21:15:07 -0500 > From: "Paul T. O'Leary" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] "stop" legally defined > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > So, if my heart continues to beat, and pushes slightly outward on my > chest wall, I'm in violation? > > What if I blink? > > Even the nonsense about a car rocking forward then back is just that -- > nonsense (another eight-letter word comes to mind, but....). Think about > it; at the instance between the forward motion and the backward motion, > the car's motion has ceased. So technically, the driver should be able > to start moving again after that. Or would the fuel sloshing around in > the tank constitute "motion"? > > Of course, the electrons in every atom in the vehicle are constantly in > motion. Complete cessation of motion only occurs at the hypothetical > absolute zero temperature (0K). > > "Equal" consideration under the law sounds good, indeed. But it's > useless without some sort of sanity check. It's extreme applications of > the law like this that waste taxpayers' money, mess with people's lives > (one lost day to go to court to fight such a "frivolous" charge can cost > someone her/his job), and clog up the works of the system even worse > than they would be otherwise. > > I would love to see any "you have to put a foot down to constitute > stopping" enforcement put up against the Americans with Disabilities Act. > > On 2012/05/17 13:02, STRAWSER, Charles wrote: > > I think the tangent we are on is interesting, but deserves a new subject > > line. > > > > ------------ > > > > Arthur wrote: ?Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch their > > wheels. Do their wheels completely cease moving if they are not forced > > to stop by a flow of traffic?? > > > > ------------- > > > > Long ago I heard a law enforcement officer say that even if a motorist?s > > wheels were stopped, it could be argued that ?motion had not ceased? if > > the driver only stopped long enough for the car?s body to rock forward > > (over the stopped wheels), then backward (still over stopped wheels), > > then took their foot off the brake and allowed the car?s wheels to start > > rolling forward before the oscillation of the car?s body over the > > stopped wheels had ceased, i.e. COMPLETE cessation of motion (nothing in > > the statute Arthur cites mention that the motion that has to cease only > > includes ?forward? motion). > > > > I personally think that is perhaps too rigid a view of what constitutes > > a legal stop for a motorist (or a track standing cyclist), but I?d be > > fine with an individual law enforcement officer taking that view as long > > as s/he consistently applied such an extremely narrow view of ?stop? to > > both motorists and bicyclists. > > > > That is, after all, all we are asking for: equal consideration under the > > law that is due bicyclists by Wisconsin state statutes. > > > > Chuck Strawser > > Pedestrian & Bicycle Transportation Planner > > Commuter Solutions > > Transportation Services > > UW-Madison > > Room 124 WARF > > 610 Walnut St > > Madison WI 53726 > > 608-263-2969 > > www.wisc.edu/trans > > > > *From:*Ross, Arthur > > > > *CHAPTER 340 VEHICLES ? GENERAL PROVISIONS* > > > > *340.01 Words and phrases defined. *In s. 23.33 and chs. 340 to 349 and > > 351, the following words and phrases have the designated meanings unless > > a different meaning is expressly provided or the context clearly > > indicates a different meaning: > > > > *(62) *?Stop? when required means complete cessation from movement. > > > > Reasonable people can disagree as to just what this means with respect > > to what behavior by a bicyclist constitutes a legal stop. Reasonable > > people can include a bicyclist, a police officer, a judge, and/or a jury > > :- ) > > > > Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch their wheels. Do their > > wheels completely cease moving if they are not forced to stop by a flow > > of traffic on the intersecting street? This not an argument for > > bicyclists not stopping, just an interesting study in behavior. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Bikies mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > -- > Paul T. O'Leary > Chronic Nuisance > Madison, WI USA > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 21:49:29 -0500 > From: Grant Foster <[email protected]> > To: "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] "stop" legally defined > Message-ID: > <caapdrbjdqx01pf4pq_jr3bkk_ffsgah2v_ns_6xb+06whrq...@mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > I actually think it's the wrong approach to advocate for equal treatment, > as in, treat me just like you treat a motor vehicle. We are different and > we should be treated differently. I believe we should be afforded equal > access to a safe and efficient infrastructure, but pretending I'm a car is > an easy way out. I can't drive down the belt line on my bike and I don't > want to-it's unsafe and it would severely impact the motor vehicle traffic. > Let's advocate for equal rights, not equal treatment. > > In the same way, I shouldn't ever have to come to a complete stop at a stop > sign unless the situation truly calls for it. There is absolutely no value > in me stopping at a stop sign (as opposed to yielding) except that by not > stopping I might make a driver envious. > > There's actually no value in motor vehicles stopping instead of yielding at > the vast majority of posted intersections. The only reason we have so many > stop signs is because motor vehicle drivers don't yield very well. > > Grant > On May 17, 2012 1:02 PM, "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I think the tangent we are on is interesting, but deserves a new subject > > line.**** > > > > ------------**** > > > > Arthur wrote: ?Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch their > > wheels. Do their wheels completely cease moving if they are not forced > to > > stop by a flow of traffic??**** > > > > -------------**** > > > > Long ago I heard a law enforcement officer say that even if a motorist?s > > wheels were stopped, it could be argued that ?motion had not ceased? if > the > > driver only stopped long enough for the car?s body to rock forward (over > > the stopped wheels), then backward (still over stopped wheels), then took > > their foot off the brake and allowed the car?s wheels to start rolling > > forward before the oscillation of the car?s body over the stopped wheels > > had ceased, i.e. COMPLETE cessation of motion (nothing in the statute > > Arthur cites mention that the motion that has to cease only includes > > ?forward? motion).**** > > > > ** ** > > > > I personally think that is perhaps too rigid a view of what constitutes a > > legal stop for a motorist (or a track standing cyclist), but I?d be fine > > with an individual law enforcement officer taking that view as long as > s/he > > consistently applied such an extremely narrow view of ?stop? to both > > motorists and bicyclists.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > That is, after all, all we are asking for: equal consideration under the > > law that is due bicyclists by Wisconsin state statutes.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > Chuck Strawser > > Pedestrian & Bicycle Transportation Planner > > Commuter Solutions > > Transportation Services > > UW-Madison > > Room 124 WARF > > 610 Walnut St > > Madison WI 53726 > > 608-263-2969 > > www.wisc.edu/trans **** > > > > *From:* Ross, Arthur > > > > **** > > > > ** ** > > > > *CHAPTER 340 VEHICLES ? GENERAL PROVISIONS* > > > > *340.01 Words and phrases defined. *In s. 23.33 and chs. 340 to 349 and > > 351, the following words and phrases have the designated meanings unless > > a different meaning is expressly provided or the context clearly > indicates > > a different meaning:**** > > > > *(62) *?Stop? when required means complete cessation from movement.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > Reasonable people can disagree as to just what this means with respect to > > what behavior by a bicyclist constitutes a legal stop. Reasonable > people > > can include a bicyclist, a police officer, a judge, and/or a jury :- ) > ** > > ** > > > > ** ** > > > > Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch their wheels. Do their > > wheels completely cease moving if they are not forced to stop by a flow > of > > traffic on the intersecting street? This not an argument for bicyclists > > not stopping, just an interesting study in behavior. **** > > > > ** ** > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Bikies mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120517/a98a5157/attachment-0001.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:29:28 +0000 > From: Patrick Lenon <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Bikies] "stop" legally defined > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > > I should point out again at this time that the cop who stopped me for not > putting my foot down wasn't really interested in traffic enforcement and > safety. He was just jacking up bikers, apparently at the behest of a > Fitchburg city official with a grudge. That cop was not representative of > most law enforcement, or even of current Fitchburg government. > Well, maybe a couple of the Madison bike cops... ;) > > ------------ > Patrick Lenon > > Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 21:49:29 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] "stop" legally defined > > I actually think it's the wrong approach to advocate for equal treatment, > as in, treat me just like you treat a motor vehicle. We are different and > we should be treated differently. I believe we should be afforded equal > access to a safe and efficient infrastructure, but pretending I'm a car is > an easy way out. I can't drive down the belt line on my bike and I don't > want to-it's unsafe and it would severely impact the motor vehicle traffic. > Let's advocate for equal rights, not equal treatment. > > In the same way, I shouldn't ever have to come to a complete stop at a > stop sign unless the situation truly calls for it. There is absolutely no > value in me stopping at a stop sign (as opposed to yielding) except that by > not stopping I might make a driver envious. > > There's actually no value in motor vehicles stopping instead of yielding > at the vast majority of posted intersections. The only reason we have so > many stop signs is because motor vehicle drivers don't yield very well. > > Grant > On May 17, 2012 1:02 PM, "STRAWSER, Charles" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I think the tangent we are on is interesting, but deserves a new subject > line. > ------------Arthur wrote: ?Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch > their wheels. Do their wheels completely cease moving if they are not > forced to stop by a flow of traffic?? > -------------Long ago I heard a law enforcement officer say that even if a > motorist?s wheels were stopped, it could be argued that ?motion had not > ceased? if the driver only stopped long enough for the car?s body to rock > forward (over the stopped wheels), then backward (still over stopped > wheels), then took their foot off the brake and allowed the car?s wheels to > start rolling forward before the oscillation of the car?s body over the > stopped wheels had ceased, i.e. COMPLETE cessation of motion (nothing in > the statute Arthur cites mention that the motion that has to cease only > includes ?forward? motion). > I personally think that is perhaps too rigid a view of what constitutes a > legal stop for a motorist (or a track standing cyclist), but I?d be fine > with an individual law enforcement officer taking that view as long as s/he > consistently applied such an extremely narrow view of ?stop? to both > motorists and bicyclists. > That is, after all, all we are asking for: equal consideration under the > law that is due bicyclists by Wisconsin state statutes. > Chuck Strawser > > Pedestrian & Bicycle Transportation Planner > Commuter Solutions > > Transportation Services > UW-Madison > > Room 124 WARF > 610 Walnut St > > Madison WI 53726 > 608-263-2969 > > www.wisc.edu/trans > From: Ross, Arthur > > > > CHAPTER 340 VEHICLES ? GENERAL PROVISIONS > 340.01 Words and phrases defined. In s. 23.33 and chs. 340 to 349 and 351, > the following words and phrases have the designated meanings unless a > different meaning is expressly provided or the context clearly indicates a > different meaning: > (62) ?Stop? when required means complete cessation from movement. > > Reasonable people can disagree as to just what this means with respect to > what behavior by a bicyclist constitutes a legal stop. Reasonable people > can include a bicyclist, a police officer, a judge, and/or a jury :- ) > > Watch motorists approaching a stop sign. Watch their wheels. Do their > wheels completely cease moving if they are not forced to stop by a flow of > traffic on the intersecting street? This not an argument for bicyclists > not stopping, just an interesting study in behavior. > > _______________________________________________ > > Bikies mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120518/a0f2dd1c/attachment-0001.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 15:48:53 +0000 > From: Melanie Foxcroft <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: [Bikies] Invitation: Biking to Renewable Energy Fest Custer > arriving June 14, ... @ Thu Jun 14 - Sun Jun 17, 2012 > ([email protected]) > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"; > DelSp="yes" > > You have been invited to the following event. > > Title: Biking to Renewable Energy Fest Custer arriving June 14, 2012. I'm > looking for people to ride bikes with, camping along the way, to the > Renewable Energy Fest. Are you interested or do you know anyone > interested? Camping along the way. I would most likely take the bus one > way (either to or from, depending on other's schedules). I'm a "moderate > distance" rider, comfortable with about 40 miles per day "fully loaded" > with tent, sleeping bag etc. It's much safer and more companionable to go > with others. Please let me know if you have any ideas on where to search, > or if you already know people going up. Thanks! > Biking to or from Renewable Energy Fest Custer WI (I would most likely take > the bus one way but maybe ride both ways, and camp up there) > When: Thu Jun 14 ? Sun Jun 17, 2012 > Where: Madison to Custer WI > Calendar: [email protected] > Who: > * Melanie Foxcroft - organizer > * [email protected] > > Event details: > > https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=OWtqMTFpbnFxMzMzdHNybGMwOGMwMWQ3NmsgYmlraWVzQGxpc3RzLmRhbmVuZXQub3Jn&tok=MTgjbWVsZm94NDdAZ21haWwuY29tOTVmOTVjYjNmOGUwMDYxYTNkMTBjZGU4YTI3NzExNzQyYzBkNGMxNw&ctz=America/Chicago&hl=en > > Invitation from Google Calendar: https://www.google.com/calendar/ > > You are receiving this courtesy email at the account > [email protected] because you are an attendee of this event. > > To stop receiving future notifications for this event, decline this event. > Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at > https://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings > for > your entire calendar. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120518/6679caee/attachment-0001.htm > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: text/calendar > Size: 1825 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120518/6679caee/attachment-0001.icz > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: invite.ics > Type: application/ics > Size: 1863 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120518/6679caee/attachment-0001.bin > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 10:48:53 -0500 > From: Melanie Foxcroft <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Bikies] Biking to Renewable Energy Fest > Message-ID: > <caorj6da4n8kk+pps3oda0x-fosvorvhwsougvynaxwbzkrn...@mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Biking to Renewable Energy Fest Custer arriving June 14, 2012. I'm looking > for people to ride bikes with, camping along the way, to the Renewable > Energy Fest. Are you interested or do you know anyone interested? Camping > along the way. I would most likely take the bus one way (either to or from, > depending on other's schedules). I'm a "moderate distance" rider, > comfortable with about 40 miles per day "fully loaded" with tent, sleeping > bag etc. It's much safer and more companionable to go with others. Please > let me know if you have any ideas on where to search, or if you already > know people going up. Thanks! > Biking to or from Renewable Energy Fest Custer WI (I would most likely take > the bus one way but maybe ride both ways, and camp up there) > *When* > Jun 14 ? 17 2012 GMT-05:00 > *Where* > Madison to Custer WI > *Who* > ? > Melanie Foxcroft > ? > [email protected] > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120518/75d3579c/attachment.htm > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: text/calendar > Size: 1667 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20120518/75d3579c/attachment.icz > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > > End of Bikies Digest, Vol 43, Issue 20 > ************************************** > -- Jim <http://webpages.charter.net/jhenkel/>
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
