[*BCM*] About That Boston Bike Messenger Ordinance ...

[Tom Revay]

On 11/23/2004 at 9:16 AM Jym Dyer wrote:

>=v= Way back in 1998, following some media-fueled hysteria,
>Boston passed an onerous bike messenger ordinance (Chapter 302).
>It required that messengers, amongst other things, display a
>metal plate on their bike.  (The plate was supposed to go under
>the seat, but it was too wide, and many messengers cut up their
>legs.)  

Most have therefore put it into the spokes of the wheels, or have bent the sides to wrap around frame tubes or hang it under the seat without displaying the full width.

>The ordinance was used as a pretext for stopping and
>harassing any biker who looked like a messenger.

Like the guy who became Boston's short-lived bicycle program manager.  He was stopped and asked for this commercial license, based upon the fact that he was wearing a helmet, and messengers under the law are required to wear helmets.

("Cluseau!  How does an idiot become a police officer?"
     "Well, first he takes the examination, then he attends the academy ....")

>Does anyone know whether it's still in place,
>or has been modified?  Or continues to be enforced?  What's
>the dealio?

Yes, no, sporadically, and here's what:

I've heard of the law being enforced on two kinds of occasions, being --

1)  The police decide to have a "crackdown," and start demanding working papers from cyclists they think might be messengers.  Their formula for deciding seems to be based upon the person's appearance, as modified by the phase of the moon, the height of the tide at Boston Light, and other scientific and obviously non-prejudicial factors.  

The police can do this under their power to enforce commercial licenses.  Of course, nobody walks around town asking plumbers or electricians or doctors for their passbook, but if you're on a bike and you "look" like a messenger, you might be pulled over just for this purpose.  

2)  Some altercation happens, as did occur a few years ago when a messenger claimed a motorist assaulted him, and the motorist, in turn, alleged the same about the messenger.  When a crowd of messengers gathered, the police arrived and one announced that anyone without papers to present would be fined $100.  Witnesses are so darned peksy, especially when they contradict what the police who weren't there saw!

>=v= As with most states complying with the Universal Vehicle
>Code, New York only allows localities to require their own
>residents to register bikes, but there's no way for the cop
>on the beat to know whether a biker is a resident of New York
>City.  So this can be onerous for the many tourists who come
>to NYC and ride a bike.

Massachusetts never got around to passing the UVC.  But the nature of the messenger's license differs from required bicycle registration, or driver's licensing.  As stated, the messenger is a commercially licensed practitioner.  The license is on his or her business, not his or her vehicle, despite the requirements to display the license tag.

>=v= If you want to fax the foolish councilwoman to oppose
>the proposed bill, there's a web form here:
>
>http://www.transalt.org/press/askta/041119.html
>
>You can edit the form letter to mention that you visit NYC
>with your bike and, if this is passed, you'll spend your
>tourist dollars elsewhere.
>    <_Jym_>
>
>P.S.:  You might not want to mention the Yankees.  She might
>be a little touchy about that ...

Yes, the Yankees really know how to choke ... some people up, don't they? 8-)


.......................Tom