[*BCM*] tunnel etc.
contraelolvido at riseup.net
contraelolvido at riseup.net
Wed Aug 31 11:23:42 EDT 2005
> I don't understand why he doesn't think going through the tunnel is
> If we are riding on the street, we are considered a legal vehicle. Bound
> all the constraints of a motorcycle, car, bus, etc.
This is not true at all, and only goes to show how little you know of the
law. Are bike's required to follow minimum speed limits (i believe 20
below maximum)? Do bike's have to be register, or inspected, or licensed?
Are bike's allowed to pass on the left or the right? I could go on.
Bike's have to follow *some, but not all* equivalent, not equal, rules to
other vehicles. The tunnel's sign prohibits motor vehicles and pedestrians
(i believe), which are both strict legal categories under which bikes
Furthermore even if bikes were applicable, it isn't a crime nor an
arrestable offense. It's a traffic violation (like a speeding ticket). The
police had no authority to arrest bikers in traffic stops (even if you
refused to ID yourself) as of last year-ish (making the traffic ticket
unenforceable). Now they do, thanks to massbike - looking out for us.
> Now going through the tunnel is a a different story. If the cops got
> organized to come down on CM, they would know that we were going to end up
> there at some point every month.
Or if the cops got organized in brookline/boston/cambridge they could
arrest the mass on the massave bridge/copley sq/harvard st. Do you really
think that cambridge police are going to have the dozens of officers
required for mass arrest sitting around waiting by the tunnel (hidden from
view of course) for three or four hours every month on the chance that the
mass *might* come by (they'd have to be waiting since we go through so
fast). Then, on top of that, does cambridge have the capacity to arrest
3/400 bikers at once, which put a huge strain even on New York friggin
City's police? Especially when they know that the arrests won't be upheld?
Come on, grow up.
> He says that the police have no right to arrest us (true), and that the
> don't have the power to arrest us (false). That's just naive. Cops can
> take you downtown anytime they want (New York CM).
Ya and how many of those arrests were sustained? If your logic is that
they can arrest you at any point for any reason then I agree with you,
cops have unwieldy power and often abuse it. But If you're going to use
that as excuse not to do something you have every legal right to do
(without getting arrested at least), then I disagree with you. A cop
*could* arrest you for any number of biking activities that they don't
understand or piss them off.
> Prognosis: Internet lurker that just likes to stir things up
> Diagnosis: Another filter on my spam blocker.
Which would make sense if I started this conversation... And I assume that
your response to people disagreeing with you is to block them? It must be
lonely, lonely, ignorant life you live. It could also explain why, after
dozens of conversations on this list, you still don't understand how the
mass laws effecting bikes work.
More information about the Bostoncriticalmass