[*BCM*] tunnel etc.

[Anne Wolfe]

I'd anticpate less trouble from Cambridge cops than MBTA cops, since it is 
their jurisdiction.

On 31/08/05, contraelolvido at riseup.net <contraelolvido at riseup.net> wrote: 
> 
> > I don't understand why he doesn't think going through the tunnel is
> > illegal.
> > If we are riding on the street, we are considered a legal vehicle. Bound
> > by
> > 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
> don't fall.
> 
> 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
> > cops
> > 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.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Boston Critical Mass mailing list
> list at bostoncriticalmass.org
> http://bostoncriticalmass.org/list
> 



-- 
Anne Wolfe, LL.M.
Mobile: ( 077484) 76599 
"In canon law (probably not a course you attended) there is something
called "an occasion of sin." --anyway, you are just an
"occasion of wacky." -- John Hildebidle, Bard of Porter Square
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bostoncoop.net/pipermail/bostoncriticalmass/attachments/20050831/9f44b487/attachment.htm