copyright 2006 Associated Press
The latest on NYPD edicts against cyclists
Wed, 08/23/2006 - 9:16pm
Thu, 08/24/2006 - 12:03am
#1
Good luck, City of NY, in proving my intent.
"""The latest proposal, he said, is expected to require any group of 10 people or more to get a parade permit if they INTENDED to travel on a city street in a manner that does not comply with ALL applicable traffic laws.""
My response: We INTENDED to comply with all applicable traffic laws when we started. For that reason we did not apply for a parade permit. Proof of this is we did stop at the first several red lights. You gonna prove my original intent was otherwise? How?
The reason hate crimes and anti-discrimination laws are so hard to prosecute is the difficulty in proving someone's intent. So the city is going to prove what my intent was at the outset of the ride? And if we occasionally and intermittently stop at some red lights, wouldn't that suggest it wasn't our intent to break ALL applicable traffic laws?
But I remind my readers once more, I'm a two-time law school dropout."
Fri, 08/25/2006 - 5:06pm
#2
A further way to comply with a law in order to overcome the law.
"I shouldn't put this here since, if the NYPD is so sharp in its collection of intelligence as it would have us believe, they monitor our MB, and this can only help them in their writing of the regulation...but if they write that we are guilty of parading without a permit if we ""intend to travel on a city street in a manner that does not comply with ALL applicable traffic laws,"" it seems if we hand signal our turns, we are obeying an applicable traffic law and, therefore, are not disobeying ALL applicable traffic laws; therefore, we would not fall into the PD's proscription.
Yes, this is sophistry...but a strict constructionist judge, non-activist judge, such as law-and-order types embrace, should embrace this very literal reading of the intended law."
Thu, 08/24/2006 - 5:21pm
#3
What the Club is Doing
"Maggie, you ask, ""What is the Club, as an entity that lives or dies on the basis of its rides, doing about this??""
As President, I sit on the NY City Bicycle Coalition which has been on top of this. Who do you think put all the pressure on the NYPD to withdraw the original proposal? We are concentrating now on getting the City Council to pass a resolution that would stop the NYPD proposal in its tracks. I have already put a post up asking every member to email his/her City Council Member to ask for support in this fight. I regularly write to various government officials on behalf of our 1800 members on issues such as this. But think how much more powerful it would be if all 1800 members would take 5 minutes to write.
The next time I put up a call to action (such as I just posted this evening about the Houston Street Bike Lane) I expect you and many, if not all members, to join the fight.
Thank you for your concern. Please turn it into action. (This is addressed not just to Maggie, who, I'm sure, does take the time to send emails to government officials.)
"
Thu, 08/24/2006 - 6:44pm
#4
Approved route?
Okay, perhaps this is beside the point, but... My route is up Riverside and across the GW Bridge... then I'm out of NYC and I don't think the NYPD cares where I go.
Thu, 08/24/2006 - 6:59pm
#5
An interim solution
To the extent a NYCC ride has more than 20 riders, the group should be divided into two groups (with a group leader for each) and riding appx. 1 minute apart. If approached by the police, each group does not acknowledge the presence of the other. This would only need to be done until reaching the city boundaries.
While not ideal, and the fight should continue, there are ways to frustrate those who try to frustrate us.
(I do not put this forth as legal advice, as the extent of my direct legal experience is half a Princeton Review LAST course).
