Holy shatz! Cop stops bicycle! - Page 4 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

06-11-2004, 09:15 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, maxo wrote:

> Riding your bike on the sidewalk on Sheridan road in Chicago WILL get
> your bike impounded. Irony is that it's one of the scariest places for
> even experienced riders in town--I've seen full dress racer boys chicken
> out and jump up on the sidewalk there.

Yeesh. Sounds like fun and merriment for all involved...

06-11-2004, 09:16 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:

> >There's no law requiring
> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>
> Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law. If
bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
> required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

-Stern

06-11-2004, 09:16 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:

> >There's no law requiring
> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>
> Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law. If
bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
> required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

-Stern

06-11-2004, 09:16 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:

> >There's no law requiring
> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>
> Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law. If
bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
> required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

-Stern

06-11-2004, 09:16 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:

> >There's no law requiring
> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>
> Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law. If
bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
> required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

-Stern

06-11-2004, 09:16 PM

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:

> >There's no law requiring
> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>
> Nor should there be.

I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law. If
bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
> required.

Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

-Stern

06-11-2004, 10:24 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ch.edu>, Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:
>
>> >There's no law requiring
>> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
>> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>>
>> Nor should there be.
>
> I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
> road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
> means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law If
> bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
> enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

So you are going to require people to license their shoes too?
Your arguements apply in the same manner.

>> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
>> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
>> required.
>
> Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

I think you should watch some old films from the early 20th century.

06-11-2004, 10:24 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ch.edu>, Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:
>
>> >There's no law requiring
>> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
>> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>>
>> Nor should there be.
>
> I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
> road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
> means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law If
> bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
> enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

So you are going to require people to license their shoes too?
Your arguements apply in the same manner.

>> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
>> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
>> required.
>
> Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

I think you should watch some old films from the early 20th century.

06-11-2004, 10:24 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ch.edu>, Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:
>
>> >There's no law requiring
>> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
>> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>>
>> Nor should there be.
>
> I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
> road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
> means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law If
> bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
> enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

So you are going to require people to license their shoes too?
Your arguements apply in the same manner.

>> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
>> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
>> required.
>
> Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

I think you should watch some old films from the early 20th century.

06-11-2004, 10:24 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] ch.edu>, Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Florence Henderson Had A Mullet wrote:
>
>> >There's no law requiring
>> >registration of bicycles or carrying an operator's license -- or, for that
>> >matter, any form of identification at all --
>>
>> Nor should there be.
>
> I disagree. Bicycles are required to follow all the same rules of the
> road...except there are no teeth to this requirement, since there's no
> means by which to exact consequences if they flout traffic law If
> bicycles are to be taken seriously as a means of transportation,
> enforceable consequences for traffic law violation is critical.

So you are going to require people to license their shoes too?
Your arguements apply in the same manner.

>> It's a lot harder to ride a horse than it is to ride a bike, yet back in
>> the days when everyone rode around on horseback, a license wasn't
>> required.
>
> Horses weren't mixed in with cars, either.

I think you should watch some old films from the early 20th century.