[*BCM*] Why massbike owes me $20

[Thomas John Vitolo]

Quoting lungfish <lungfish at fastmail.fm>:

> So I got pulled over last night too- some cops demands my ID, writes
> up
> a citation for $20, and make plenty of entertaining banter in the
> meantime. For example, like any self respecting individual I
> questioned
> the need to show my papers to some cop for not having  a front light.
> 
> They say that bikes are now LEGALLY THE SAME as cars.  Hmm, that's
> certainly different than previous laws which say that bikes have to
> follow the rules of the road, but are still DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT
> than
> cars. 
> So, knowing of Massbike's recent cop-collaboration, upon getting home
> I look up the entire text of the bike legislation they just had passed.

So far, you're doing great.  Questioning the need to show ID?  Good stuff.  And,
in fact, you aren't required to.  Additionally, while there are many operational
laws in common between bikes and cars, the intersection isn't 100%, so, they are
still distinctly different than cars.


> So here are my questions:
> -what is the utility of making cyclists identify themselves?  We
> don't
> need licenses, what is there to prove except that this legislation
> furthers a sense of fear and state supremacy?

If you're being issued a citation, requiring identification ensures that you're
not giving a false name, and therefore skirting the penalty of violating a code.
 That's utility.  You can argue whether or not it's appropriate, but clearly you
can see that if the intention is to enforce the codes and the financial
penalties, that identification is useful.

> I guess it's ok to
> complain about "big brother" when you're talking about the
> president, but not in regards to liberal politiking. 

It is in no way Orwellian to require identification for those accused of
violating the law.

> -Take a typical, unlit cyclist- no headlamp, no backlight, no
> "retro
> reflective material on each shoe"- how is charging them $20-60
> exactly
> going to help them get equipped to bike safely?  

How is charging somebody $120 for speeding going to help their shoe lose weight?
 How is charging a company thousands of dollars in fines going to help them obey
the OSHA regulations?  A fine isn't designed to help you come into compliance --
it's designed to help you decide to come into complinance before you get caught.
 A front lamp is less than $20, so you made the wrong choice.  You could have
purchased a front lamp for under $20, and still had change for a burrito.  Now,
you're out the $20, and you still run the risk of citation again.

Fines are punishment.  Avoid the cost of punishment by pre-emptively following
the law.  Or, just ride around on your own private property and be worry free!

> -Where is this money going? Certainly not the the individual
> biker's bikelight fund!

Same place speeding tickets and parking tickets go in all liklihood.  Perhaps
the general budget, perhaps earmarked to fund the enforcement of those
regulations, I'm not sure.  Write your state senator, or perhaps an alderman. 
Then, get back to us!

> -Why is massbike putting in effort to pass unenforceable
> legislation
> regarding car/bike interaction?

It sounds like you were just "enforced" -- so what makes it unenforceable?  No
law (save Newton & his fellow scientists') can be enforced 100% of the time --
but, that doesn't make it unenforceable.  I suspect they may be interested in
bicycle safety more than libertarian ideals of minimal legislation.  The fact is
that headlamps do make you more safe, as do requirements on the behavior of
automobiles.

> And "recommending" signage?

Well, they do serve as a lobby group.

> - If this law went one step further, we'd need licenses to ride a
> bike.

To be honest, I'm not sure that it's an unreasonable requirement if you'd like
to operate your vehicles on public roads.  While it's really hard for a cyclist
to ride into a non-moving object and kill himself or others, it is fairly easy
for a cyclist to enduce a driver to swerve, putting everybody at risk.  You want
to interact in a system with 6000 pound vehicles travelling in excess of 30
miles per hour?  Licensing isn't unreasonable.

Of course, just like your car, you can drive it around on your property unlicenced.
 
> This type of thing is exactly the type of "regressive tax" that
> Democrats like to complain about- only this time it's not the
> republicans doing it, so it's ok, right?

It's not a tax.  Therefore, it isn't a regressive tax.  You don't have to own a
bike, and within the city of enforcement you're free to take the subway or bus
all you like.  Enforcing minimal safety standards in public space isn't
unreasonable, and has been tradition in the United States of America since 1789.

> At work, everyday, I see
> people who can afford $300-$1000 bikes, either because they put all
> of their money into bike gear, or (more likely) because they just have
> a lot of money!  I also see people riding bikes they found in the
> trash,
> had passed down to them, or don't have the time or money to keep them
> in good shape.  Guess which of these are going to have more trouble
> paying both $20 on their ticket?

Hey -- its rough being poor.  Those same people will also have trouble putting
quarters in the meter, but that doesn't mean they don't have to pay their
parking tickets.  It really isn't that expensive to make your bicycle compliant,
and I'd wager it's likely less expensive than a single $20 ticket if you shop
around a bit and be creative.

> I might have a little bit of respect for
> massbike if they did something that might actually benefit bikers in
> any way- such as setting up this program so that the cops/ massbike buy
> light sets wholesale, ticket bikers for the cost, and send them off
> with a light set. But of course, who would do that?  It wouldn't gain
> revenue for the cambridge cops, would it?

You fail to understand the role of a fine.  If all fines worked that way, than
everybody could simply flaunt any law, and then merely pay to come into
compliance once they got caught.  Power plants wouldn't bother with pollution
controls.  Etc.  Instead, consider this paradigm.  *Imagine* that you got
another $20 ticket today.  Now, take that *imaginary fine*, and enter it into
your *imaginary program*, where you can use that to buy a **real** headlamp for
your bicycle.  See -- its just like you envisioned!

> The biggest flaw in this strategy of "cracking down" on bikers is that,
> like any law passed from above, it teaches people to evade the law, not
> to ride responsibly; that is, unless there is a cop on every single
> street corner taking IDs and giving tickets constantly.  

It's true, any regulation that people wouldn't follow on their own forces a
decision: comply, or evade.  Most people do the cost-benefit analysis and
comply.  Others, like you, take your chances.  That's cool -- but don't come
bitching when you take a chance and lose.  You could have played it safe, and
right now you'd have a headlamp (and memories of a good burrito) to show for it.

> Telling bikers, on the massbike website, that the most important
> thing they can do for bicycle advocacy is join their mailing list, is
> like telling a battered wife to ask her abuser to take her back.

No.  Go ahead and throw in a Nazi reference to be even more extreme when trying
to make a small (and incorrect) point.

> And one final word, it was obvious all along that, from the outset,
> CRITICAL MASS WOULD BE ILLEGAL ACCORDING TO ANY OF MASSBIKE'S TENETS.

Well, it was illegal before MassBike even existed.  But again, those of us who
ride in CM do a cost-benefit analysis, and choose to ride anyway, accepting the
risks.

> You people only use this list to advertise for yourselves- you are
> parasites, and have no place on this mailing list. 

I don't think so.  I enjoy the conversation, and the cross-talk amongst
different interest groups within the cycling community.


And P.S.  You give MassBike far too much credit.  They don't pass laws,
legislators do.  You've got two -- one in the house, one in the senate.  And,
ou've got a governor who could always veto.  MassBike didn't write the law, or
vote on it.  Elected representativges did.  Why not get involved in the process,
if only to encourage them to ignore MassBike?  It'd be marginally productive,
which would be far more productive than bitching on a listserv.




Thomas John Vitolo
Ph D Systems Engineering Candidate,
Boston University

Support a few technologists in Washington.  Go to:
http://actblue.com/list/stomv