Hey, there! Log in / Register

Crackdown on bicyclists

75 bike riders have received tickets so far this afternoon as the city has chosen to crack down on traffic violations around the BU Bridge on Commonwealth Avenue.

The city put out a statement about the enforcement effort citing a number of recent crashes between cars and bicycles at the bridge intersections.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

About time!

up
Voting closed 0

-what those two bike cops were doing standing just outside the bike lane looking menacing. I thought the guy was going to push me off the bike he looked so closely at me. Glad he didn't see me run that red light just at the beginning of that intersection...

up
Voting closed 0

Don't just confine this to the BU Bridge, either. Expand it all the way up and down Comm Ave, from the Commons to Packard's Corner! I wanna see a crackdown on all those smug, arrogant bastards who are using the new bike lanes...

...TO DOUBLE PARK THEIR CARS!

up
Voting closed 0

forget the bike line. *any* double parked cars.

My street is lined with double parked cars all day everyday lately because construction crews in the condos can't be bothered with parking in their permitted areas or using garages.

up
Voting closed 0

haHA!

up
Voting closed 0

Let's extend the crackdown to people on vespas and scooters who think they're above the law as well. Like the guy I saw driving a vespa on Comm. Ave. in the Back Bay who blew through the red light almost knocking down an elderly guy with a cane who was already half way across the street in the crosswalk. Vespa driver, you're an official Masshole and I hope you get a ticket. F*cker.

up
Voting closed 0

There is a good chance that guy on the Vespa also had it mis-rgistered as a moped, meaning no license plate and no insurance. For the most park, scooters have been above the law, skirting registatration, insurance and their rules that require them to operate the same as a car.

up
Voting closed 0

Boston drivers are known around the country as ignorant, aggressive, and for igoring/breaking traffic laws. When is Menino going to order a crackdown on cars and trucks? Rolling through stop signs, not signaling to turn, taking rights on red when its illegal, double parking, stopping in the crosswalk instead of the stop line at reds and stop signs, etc. I see happen daily, sometimes in front of cops, who do nothing. Why are massholes allowed to drive however they want and not get ticketed? I obey the rules when I'm biking, but cars don't, and I don't see why Menino refuses to have them obey the rules too.

up
Voting closed 0

I see a lot of this too, and yes, sometimes in front of cops. Aggressive driving too; twice in the last month I've seen someone blaring a horn at someone doing something like holding up the line of traffic to wait to make a left turn onto a side street (god forbid you want to go anywhere without a light), and a cop was right there and didn't do anything.

up
Voting closed 0

We all see those redlight violations where there is a cop right there and he doesn't do anything. I can speak from experience that every cop has probably gotten into an accident or came close to one trying to pull someone over when it isn't safe to do so. Often times you have to go on the other side of the road, or just put on your lights and sirens causeing people in front of you to panic.

Trust me, when you are in a police car and you turn on your lights and sirens out of nowhere, people around you do crazy things. Some people pull over to the left, go through the red light themselves, just hold onto the brakes etc.

Then there are areas where it simply is never safe to pull over cars. Look at this BU bridge for example. Going outbound on Comm Ave there are a few extra lanes to pull cars over, but every other direction you have to pull them over in a lane that needs to be used by traffic. This always makes things tougher.

There is also the case that in Boston I'd say about 25%-50% of the marked cruisers you see aren't even working patrol at that time. They are traveling to meetings between districts, heading to a call that doesn't need lights and sirens, or doing some other administrative assignment etc.

Then there are the times where you want to be 100% sure someone actually broke the law before you want to issue a citation. Just because you saw something, it doesn't mean the cop saw the exact same thing. This is especially true when people honk their horns for no reason. People think its so easy to figure out who is honking their horn in traffic. If there is a large group of cars, its very hard to be 100% sure who is honking their horn.

That being said, there are going to be cops that simply don't want to pull someone over for whatever reason (lazy, indifferent, don't care whatever).

But I'm all for just getting the license plate down and writing the owner a citation for whatever the driver did. That is often times the safest way to cite drivers.

up
Voting closed 0

Oh, this all makes sense, especially with running red lights.

In both horn situations I was thinking of, the person honking the horn was wildly gesticulating, in one case out the window with a choice bunch of slurs to go along with it. The one with the dude screaming out the window was on a two-lane street. I was right behind the honker, and to my right was a very young female officer sitting in a police cruiser on a side street, watching the whole thing with an "I hope nothing bad happens" worried sorta look. Really? She couldn't have pulled the dude over? The shrink in me was pretty horrified at the thought of someone who would behave this way right in front of a cop. Gotta wonder what else he'd be capable of doing.

up
Voting closed 0

Now she could have just been drinking a coffee and not been in the mood to do her job, but there is another aspect to traffic enforcement that probably should be mentioned.

Basically, the more cars you pull over, and the more people you have an interaction with, the more citizen complaints you will get. Whether the complaints are valid or not, the city takes these things very seriously and cops can be gunshy if they are already being watched.

That is still no excuse for not doing your job, but it is a reason why many cops don't out of their way to enforce minor infractions like horn honking. They will do the minimum and thats it.

up
Voting closed 0

She could have tapped on the window and clarified the legal issues involved.

This is something that I've seen done in other places, and I suspect that it is an effective method of policing without overusing resources. Sends the message "you are out of line and we are watching" without greenlighting the douchebaggery.

up
Voting closed 0

And the coffee might get cold.

up
Voting closed 0

a) that stereotype you mentioned is true of all people who drive in all cities or pretty much anywhere else that traffic happens. (see the comcast center parking lot after any event for more on this)...

b) i will grant you that everyone who uses public road ways for travel should be held to the laws of those roads, be it biker, motorist, pedestrian, scooter operator etc. people should also always recycle, give as much of their time to charity as possible and always love and accept others for who they are, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, class, religion or nationality...

c) the crackdown on cyclists is far more effective than ticketing every driver who doesnt use a right turn signal when turning right out of a right turn only lane because, like it or not, bikers bear the bulk of the responsibility of not getting killed when biking in high traffic areas.

when you (in the general sense) are on a bike, and we (also in the geneal sense) are in our cars, you're the one who is far more vulnerable to injury should we collide.

as an occasional driver, i am certainly going to do everything in my power to NOT hit you, but just because you are a cyclist does mean that you are given free reign to weave through traffic, fly through intersections, afil to signal, run down pedestrians crossing the street in legal crosswalks etc.

d)since you stated in your post that YOU don't engage in any of those behaviors, who cares if police are cracking down on those who do? all that means is that the road will be that much safer for you and the motorists you share it with.

up
Voting closed 0

these weren't all given this afternoon. It started in the morning. There were 3 or 4 cyclists pulled over when I biked by around 10am.

up
Voting closed 0

This is just a case of the city going after the easy target. The fact of the matter is at that very intersection every single day I see CARS blowing through the RED light.

Then they pile up in the middle and BLOCK cross-traffic, including the TRAIN.

The cops stand there blithely doing nothing. Worthless.

In NYC that's a 2 point ticket and a fine, sounds like a good idea.

IMHO, the train driver should be allowed to fucking plow through any masshole who comes to a stop on the tracks. Enter at your own risk. Put cow-catchers on the front of the trolley.

Massholes blow through every red light in existence, I've lost track of how many close calls I've had as a pedestrian. That Warren St intersection is particularly bad, but of course, they don't blame the driver. I've seen cars nearly hit other cars at that intersection.

I should clarify that I don't own or ride a bike. Bikes should follow the rules too, but at least if one of them tries to run me down I can fucking knock him on his ass.

up
Voting closed 0

The cops there are the ones that are supposed to keep the intersection clear in the first place. They are paid detail cops so if some one blocks the intersection its the cops fault.

up
Voting closed 0

I know. It still happens.

up
Voting closed 0

Good move on the part of the police. Despite the protestations of the anti-car crowd, there is a problem with some cyclist being guided by a sense if I can get away with it, I will rather than being considerate of others, never mind following traffic laws.

If the some posters are upset, it's simple obey the traffic rules, don't scare senior citizens to death and there's not problem.

Like most car drivers, most cyclists are respectful of others. Yet there are those who argue that because they have seen car and truck drivers drive irresponsibly, that it gives then the right to do the same.

Now for the first time, bike riders are being fined, just like bad drivers - sounds good to me!

up
Voting closed 0

That's fine, but they don't fine the bad drivers in this city.

up
Voting closed 0

I am a biker & follow traffic rules. I am glad they are cracking down on bicyclists. We are supposed to follow the rules of the road too, so if a car gets ticketed for blowing a red light, so should we. It's only fair & it is to promote safe cycling.

up
Voting closed 0

Whether bikers run red lights or not, they should ALWAYS, in every circumstance, stop first and look both ways. This alone will save you from getting a ticket, as you will be stopped next to the cop who would have otherwise ticketed you.

I think it's ridiculous that there are cops stationed at BU bridge ticketing bikers and NOT at the intersection of Cambridge and Harvard in Allston, stopping motorists. More motorist run that red light in one hour than bikes do in an entire day at BU bridge. If you want video proof, I'll give it to you.

up
Voting closed 0

That's one of the most dangerous intersections for cyclists in the city. Not sure how this is going to help anyone.

up
Voting closed 0

So because many drivers get away with running red lights, cops should look the other way on bicyclists doing the same? That's pretty weak logic. Two wrongs don't make a right etc etc. Everyday I see cars and bikes blow through red lights all over the Back Bay. I can't count the number of time pedestrians, including myself, have almost been hit in crosswalks by either group. I don't pretend to have a perfect solution to this but less enforcement is certainly not the answer.

up
Voting closed 0

No--of course cyclists shouldn't be blowing through red lights, but frankly when they do, it's usually the cyclist who ends up dead, not the guy in the car he plowed into. Everyone should be obeying the rules of the road, but idiots driving cars are inherently more dangerous than idiots riding bikes. I'm so tired of everyone in this city chuckling and wink-winking at our lousy driving reputation--I've lived here my whole life but it never ceases to amaze me how poorly and aggressively people drive here and I don't find it funny--I find it pretty terrifying. So yeah, let's tell the bikes to shape up (and I'd be all for licenses, frankly) but please let's not direct too much manpower towards the "low-hanging fruit"--if they need to stop more cars or start using better technology, let's crack down on the crazy car drivers first.

up
Voting closed 0

Often lost in these discussions is the danger to pedestrians posed by both cars or bicyclists not obeying the rules and running lights. A car hitting a pedestrian can certainly severely injure or kill a the person. A bicyclist hitting a pedestrian, though clearly not the same as the car's impact, can also severely injure a pedestrian. The pedestrian is defenseless in either situation. As a result, I'd like to see enforcement of both vehicles and bicyclists who engage in this behavior. To me, it's not an either-or situation.

up
Voting closed 0

The danger that pedestrians pose to cyclists and drivers when they wander around like deaf sheep on stupidjuice, ignoring the fact that that red hand things says STOP and crossing at random places from between cars and stepping in front of cyclists and drivers who have green lights.

That's why I reject the categorizaton of cyclists as "lawless": EVERYBODY around here seems to think that road rules are for children (if they even know what the rules ARE) and special grownups such as themselves don't have to obey them. One part of the problem is that nearly everyone - cyclists, peduhstrians, and drivaahs - got their road rules training from the same deficient training system when they "earned" their crackerjack box prize at their parallel parking ceremony.

MA needs to seriously beef up the walking, cycling, and driving rules knowledge necessary to get and keep a driver's license and then raise the fines and give a reasonable cut to municipalities so they will actually start enforcing the laws ON ALL ROAD USERS like they do in places where insurance is vastly cheaper.

up
Voting closed 0

I agree, I don't know if it is Massholism or the number of transplants in this city, but I believe MA really does need to do something to better educate drivers on biker rights and pedestrian crossings, and educate bikers on their rights and limitations. Unfortunately anyone can hop on a bike or walk on the sidewalk, so it is harder to force education on them, but at least getting drivers more aware of how to treat bikers would be a good first step.

Along the same lines, while I do understand people's points about how driver's are not ticketed for running lights etc, I think police ticketing bikers can serve as a learning tool for bikers. "Oh, if I run this blatant red light I may be ticketed? Maybe I shouldn't do it then." Given that this is Massachusetts and most drivers don't think this way, it's likely bikers won't either, but at least this is giving biking rules so publicity.

up
Voting closed 0

There's some kind of obliviousness/arrogance here that makes me people think they can do whatever they want no matter if they are biking, driving, or walking. Not sure why, but I don't see this in other places I've been to and lived. There's a generally wackiness to locomotion here that's insane. Nutty ass u-turns, jaywalking, bikers blowing through lights. It's all the height of ridiculousness and very dangerous for everybody. I agree with the bike crackdown (I'm mostly a pedestrian but ocasionally drive and ride), but they need to do a broader campaign against general idiotness.

up
Voting closed 0

As a retired cop, I'm curious as to what type of citation the police are issuing to the bicyclists? The MA Uniform Citation would seem to be geared toward motor vehicles only, with boxes for plate type, plate number,etc. I've never seen one issued to a bicyclist and I'm not sure it would be legal. I know a motor vehicle citation can be issued to a person charged with a drug violation or graffiti (tagging)so the Registry can sanction them, even if they aren't driving, but a bicyclist?

up
Voting closed 0

I wonder if it's even enforceable.

You're not required to have ID with you on a bike, or walking. The law only says you can't lie about your name and address to a cop.

They pull you over, ask for ID. You don't have any. Now what?

And what if you are honest, and don't pay? They put a hold on the license you don't have and don't plan on getting?

Even worse is the $15 fine for fare evasion on the T.....enforced by the DMV. If you don't want a license, then you can rack up the tickets.

up
Voting closed 0

Fare evasion is only a $15 fine? I don't think that's going to deter many freeloaders on the Green Line around BU.

up
Voting closed 0

Looks like a BU "semester pass" for 4 months of MBTA monthly passes that could access the Green Line costs $210 and upwards.

Let's say they'd only need the $210 Zone 1A. If they fare-evaded instead of buying the pass, even if they got caught 1-3 times a month, they're still money ahead. Even better deal if they get caught less frequently.

Seems like a great way to save a couple thousand dollars on your college education. You can rationalize, "hey, the Green Line is so painful that they should pay me to ride it," or "the infrastructure is crumbling anyway, and my money won't make a dent in that," or "I'm blowing this dogf*ck town when i graduate, so who cares about taxpayers or sustainability," or "I'm a poor college student who nevertheless somehow manages to afford Apple products and seemingly limitless alcohol, so I need this money."

up
Voting closed 0

The first one is. I think it goes up by $100 after that.

up
Voting closed 0

How about $100 per offense from the start? Maybe you can catch someone 1 time out of 50 on the Green Line.

There would have to be some flexibility for people who made honest mistakes. Such as people mistakenly thinking it was covered as a transfer, or being new and not knowing how fares work here.

up
Voting closed 0

The article in the globe indicated that a ne kaw was passed that enabled writing these tickets statewide when they prevously could not

up
Voting closed 0

Jan 2011 is the next session where the legislature is going to vote or pass the bill for bike laws in MA (Ch. 85 s.11B) I believe they were going to add on things and change the penalty structure.

Since the current state statute is $20 for bike enfractions, I'm not sure how much cities can charge on their bylaws.

And it depends on the courts whether or not they want to issue warrants on people that don't pay these $20 fines. They have the authority to do so, but like the weed laws, I don't think they do.

up
Voting closed 0

The last I recall, the max fine for a cyclist for anything is $20, as the max to a jaywalker is $1. While police can haul cyclists into a station house for an offense, they have no incentive to do so.

I suggest a few changes in laws and methods:

  • Increase cyclist fines, maybe to $50
  • Increase jaywalking fines, maybe to $25
  • Ticket motorists for-all-too-routine reckless driving, like 3 to 5 cars going through red lights
  • Have cops set the standards and not drive like locals

The legislature can help a bit by upping the fines and taking walking and biking violations out of the realm of the trivial. However, the huge need is for police chiefs and commissioners to stop pretending that their crews enforce or even obey traffic laws.

up
Voting closed 0

The majority of scooters are not registered legally nor insured Almost all scooters (and all Vespas) now require plates and insurance, but most are sporting moped stickers (many of them expired) and have no insurance. The moped sticker enables them to travel in the bike lane to get to the front of the traffic, behavior that just creates resentment with both motorists and bicyclist. Good thing he didn't hit the elderly gentleman, because that man would be out of luck. But it probably will take an uninsured scooterist injuring someone before the police take notice of how many vehicles are operating on the streets uninsured

up
Voting closed 0

All Vespas do not require plates and insurance still. The law is that if the engine is under 50cc and the maximum speed it's capable of is under 30 mph, then it's still a motorized bicycle and can get a sticker.

You can physically governor pretty much any scooter to 30 mph and there are those on the road that were sold with a governor on them when they were manufactured. You can't assume the scooter should require a tag until it goes faster than 30 mph (on level ground).

up
Voting closed 0

One good reason to start asking for VIN when registering a scooter: they could flag the ones who are illegally getting the sticker and inspection when they are required to have a plate.

I've seen a number of Fly 150s like the one my husband rides - top speed of 65mph in his experience - with the little sticker and parked on the sidewalk like it was a Fly 50.

up
Voting closed 0

Kaz is wrong. The RMV DOES NOT consider aftermarket restrictions, but rather goes with the manufactures specs. All Vespa 50s have an upper speed of 39 mph and require plates and insurance.

That aside, the maximum speed with a moped sticker is 25mph, so when that scooter with no plate passes you while you are traveling at 30mph, you know they are a "cheater" and also probably uninsured

The issue with larger engine scooters getting moped stickers is a combination of "cheaters" and the incompetence at the RMV. There is a black 200cc Vespa Granturismo that has a moped sticker and parks on the sidewalk on Boylston almost every day...right next to a green 150cc Vespa with no plate or sticker. The title on these vehicles clearly identify them as vehicles that require motorcycle plates.

up
Voting closed 0

There should be no difference between a plate or sticker. The only point of a plate that I can think of is that the police can read them if they are in traffic. This makes it a little easier to identify owners/drivers for criminal reasons (bikes involved in robberies, getaways etc.) It also makes it safer on traffic stops so you can identify an owner before approaching them. It might even be time to require some sort of insurance for scooter or moped owners.

I say any bike, moped, scooter, mini-bike etc that can be driven on road should have a sticker with a registration number that can be checked to see who owns it. Hell, the state can make money off the process.

I was at a car auction the other day and it was littered with mopeds and scooters that were towed by police departments in MA where they couldn't find the owner (towed off sidewalks, public property trespass, etc). Many of these owners probably didn't even report their bikes stolen. And these are good scooters too. 2003 Honda Accords were going for $300 while the scooters were going for over $1,000 in some cases.

up
Voting closed 0

Are scooters going for more because they are more practical to park and cheaper to fuel?

Or because they don't need insurance?

up
Voting closed 0

The plates are able to be registered into the database with all of the other plates. The stickers are not (last I heard). The new orange rectangular stickers are much more explicit than the old square stickers that looked more like car registration expiration stickers (in fact, some dealerships and RMV workers were handing *those* out instead of the old motorized bicycle stickers that also came with a serial code on the sticker too).

The plates also allow them to require insurance. Why do the plates make them require insurance, but the stickers can't? I don't know, maybe it has something to do with how the RMV-to-insurance company data stream works.

Anything bigger than a bicycle *does* require a sticker or plate with a registration number. I don't know if cops are able to look up that information today any better than they were about 2 years ago when moped registrations went into a drawer at the RMV and not the computer at all.

up
Voting closed 0

The VIN is taken when they register motorized bicycles.

The RMV did recently flag a bunch of motorized bicycles for dismissal of their registration because they felt the dealer information for the VIN/model violated the law.

up
Voting closed 0

I hope this is not a one shot deal. Bicyclists have become a menace to the crowed streets and roadways. They obey the law when it suits them and weave in and out, run red lights and put people in danger as they try to cross the streets. I hate them all! I hope they all get flat tires or rusted broken chains.

up
Voting closed 0

If those bicyclists were in cars, the streets would be even more crowded. You can fit like 12 bikes in the same space as a car. If you hate crowded streets you should be lobbying for bike lanes to increase ridership (decrease drivership) and create safe passing room.

up
Voting closed 0

@Kaz, your are wrong. The RMV DOES NOT consider aftermarket restrictions, but rather goes by the manufactures spes. All Vespa 50s have at least a max speed of 39 mph. Aside from that, the speed limit on a "moped" is 25 mph. So the next time someone traveling at 30 mph is passed by a scooter with no plate, they know that not only are they a "cheater", but they are also likely uninsured "cheater".

@swirlygirl, "cheaters" come in all sizes and are enabled by the incompetence at the RMV. There is a black 200cc Vespa Grandturimo sporting a moped sticker parked most days in the 400 block of Bolyston...right next to a green 150cc Vespa with NO sticker or plate. Also a Fly 50 also requires a plate based upon the manufactures specs. There are VERY few vehicles that actually meet the criteria for a moped sticker.

That is a lot of uninsured vehicles traveling on our roads

up
Voting closed 0

It doesn't matter what the RMV requires, it is what the law requires. If you put a modified motorcycle engine on a Vespa, you legally have a motorcycle, even though you could probably go down to the registry and keep registring it as a vespa without insurance.

up
Voting closed 0

And that's what quite a few 49cc owners do. There's a pretty easy engine kit for Vespas/Piaggios that can bump up the cylinder size to 80cc without having to change anything else about the scooter (in fact, the manufactured 100cc Vespa/Piaggios are the exact same body as the 49cc just with a bigger engine).

The 80cc engine is enough to get to about 40-45 mph on level ground (but what it really amounts to around here is having enough power so as not to get run over from behind going up hill).

up
Voting closed 0

It is up to the owner to prove to the RMV that any aftermarket restrictions place it within the law but if they accept the evidence that the scooter can't do more than 30 mph, they have to accept the motorized bicycle registration.

In fact, this pdf cheatsheet from Cambridge speaks specifically to the fact that removal of a restrictor plate was cause to bump it up (at the time, to a motorcycle, now to the new Limited Use Vehicle category).

up
Voting closed 0

The RMV writes the law and supposedly registers according to the law. There is no physical check to determine if it was modified up or down. They simply work from the title. So at least for now, if you are registered in accordance with the legal definitions of a specific catagory, based upon your title and manufacturer spec, you are legal

up
Voting closed 0

And the judicial branch would intrepret it. I'm sure the RMV gives its recommendations, but if a police officer wanted to check a modified vehicle to make sure it is up to standards according to the law, the police officer has the right to cite you and you have the right to appeal that to a judge. The RMV has nothing to do with it at that point.

up
Voting closed 0

As somebody who used to walk through that area, every morning, only to be greeted by several cyclists on its narrow sidewalks who cleared expected me to step into the road...

FINALLY.

Also, note to any new cyclists in the city: avoid that area. It's barely safe for pedestrians. Cyclists are at serious risk.

up
Voting closed 0

@Pete Nice, you are correct. I should have said that the RMV recommends that law. If the police really cared all they would need to do is ticket any vehicle that didn't have a plate if it is traveling in excess of 25 mph. And it theoretically could ticket it for a handful of the following:

Speeding
Failure to register (if it doesn't have a sticker)
Expired registration (if it has an expire sticker)
Failure to register correctly and lying on the form (if it has a current sticker)
Traveling without it's plate (if they pulled the plate)
Failure to inspect
Failure to insure
Traveling in the bike lane

There are probably a few more

up
Voting closed 0