Boston wants to increase fines on red-light-running bicyclists; bicyclists outraged

The speed limit in most "major" cities I can think of is 30 (off the top of my head, Manhattan is 30, Chicago is 30 "unless otherwise posted").

Where does that data come from?

Menino can kiss my red light running arse.

He would better apply his time to figuring out why so many urban residents are getting the shaft from bus drivers lately.

You know if our public transit really worked barely anyone would need to drive OR bike in this city.

I wouldn't mind increased fines across the board - drivers, bikers, pedestrians - but how ridiculous is yet another unenforceable law?

Since we're not (yet...) required to carry our papers - unless exercising the privilege of driving a motor vehicle - every pulled-over biker might well ride off with a citation made out to Lance Armstrong and every pedestrian can be Spartacus, for all the police can prove.

Now if they make sociopathological jaywalking and bicycling insanity arrestable offenses ... well, that would also help curb Boston's college population, at least until we can get the draft back up.

On my bike, I'm usually the only one I see waiting at the reds. I do, however, cautiously proceed during during the Walk sign though, so I'm not 100% innocent.

I wish they would address other areas, though. I'm sick of dodging pussies on the sidewalk, who travel at the speed I do while on the road. I also cannot stand salmons, and am just going to start playing chicken with them. I'm a big fat ass, and I wear a helmet, so I like my chances.

I think that anyone who reads the Boston biker post linked will note that the post is generally pro-fine and pro- enforcement, and the comments on that post largely agree. The quotes you pulled are also not very representative of the overall post. I personally don't have much problem with jaywalking, I think that bikes need to look out for pedestrians like cars need to look out for bikes. And the jaywalking laws (or enforcement of the auto laws) are irrelevant to the bike law. If the law says stop, I stop. If I run the light, I better have a good enough reason to convince a cop not to give me a ticket, or I will suffer the consequences.

I personally am fine with a 30 MPH speed limit as long as it is absolutely enforced. Unfortunately people think that 30 means 35 or 40, especially on the few wide and un-interrupted roads. Having such speedways (like Arlington at Tremont) on the borders of residential and high density pedestrian neighborhoods endangers everyone who is is not encased in steel and swathed in airbags.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfUnwynwZvE

Here is a much better quote from Boston Biker:

The one and only way this law could be bad is if the police go out of their way to target only cyclists. This would demonstrate that this law is simply a way to drive cyclists off the streets. Seeing as how there is almost zero traffic enforcement (of any kind, for any road user group) we shouldn’t worry about this.

I agree it's unlikely, but then again, we get the occasional Globe "journalist" who decides to make a ruckus about 100% of bikes violating the law, so who knows, there could be a push for selective enforcement.

For the record, I'm a cyclist who does not always follow the law (pedaling through a red after stopping is something I do from time to time) just as I am a pedestrian who jaywalks, and a driver who speeds and holds a liberal view regarding when a light actually has turned red (if I have an into the intersection, it's still yellow). Massholes are massholes at all levels of transportation. But if upping the fines and then enforcing them leads people to change their behavior, I'm all for it.

The auto-bicyclist fatality while tragic was inevitable regardless of what the auto speed limit is posted or what fines are levied against red-running cyclists.

Arroyo, Consalvo and Menino are one-trick ponies whose only solution to changing public-safety related behaviors is to increase fines such as fines for insufficient sidewalk shoveling,improper pit-bull restraint and red-running bicyclists. Fines by themselves are inadequate measures to change public-safety related behaviors in a city with 645,169 residents plus commuters.

I wonder if it's a fair assessment to state fewer cars obey the 30mph speed limit in Boston than adhere to it. What do you think? The problem may not even be the speed but minimizing the risk of collision - albeit, they are related. Drivers are busy getting to where they want to go and cyclists don't have steel protecting them from collision when they have to share the road.

Societies committed to bike use as a mode of transportation understand that making cycling safe is essential and that requires, separate parallel routes wherever possible, clear right of way rules and due consideration between drivers and cyclists, cyclists and drivers.

A lot of work has been done to in Denmark and the Netherlands to understand how to make cycling a safe mode of transportation, even in densely populated cities. The solution are not cheep but they do work. It requires investment but it pays off.

For starters, in addition to punitive measures such as raising fines or lowering speed limits, city government has to figure out how it can get the public engaged in the solution.

"We know that the 30 mph speed limits in the city of Boston are set higher than most major cities in the U.S."

NYC (the largest city in the entire country) speed limit: 30MPH.

"And American cities on average have higher speed limits than the most bike-friendly cities in Europe, which often limit speeds to around 20 mph."

Right, there couldn't possibly be any other considerations other than "those Europeans are SMART about SAFETY!" Like their roads being narrower, less traffic thanks to better public transit, significantly higher population density (same land area as the US, but at least twice the population.)

"I have no idea what actually caused the collision, but I'll throw out my uneducated 'common sense' opinion anyway. Everyone KNOWS that speeding is dangerous!"

Look Pete, I really don't care how fast someone goes past me while I'm on my bike. I care that they are attentive while driving, follow ALL the traffic laws, and pass safely (ie, give me enough room).

When are they going to do something about the sheer number of cars that blow red lights? They pick on bicyclists instead? I mean, I'm annoyed when a cyclist almost hits me that way, but the cars are much worse.

The masshole drivers even blow red lights when the other side is jammed up, and they just sit in the middle of the intersection blocking cross traffic -- and even blocking the trolley. The cops just stand around and twiddle their thumbs. I see this all the time at BU Bridge. Just last week I waited, packed like a sardine, as the green light cycled 3 times before we could proceed.

Before increasing fines on pedestrians how about making the intersections more pedestrian friendly? The reason why people jaywalk in this town is because the walk signals are so infrequent, and the intersections are so confusing. If traffic is stopped, why isn't the walk signal on? Why doesn't the walk signal come on more often than once every 20 minutes? I know lots of intersections you could ask these questions about. There's places with heavy foot traffic where the walk signals simply haven't worked for months, that I go every day.

Menino doesn't care about pedestrians.

-think what we're all missing here isn't that bikers are bad. I wait for each-and-every red light I come across and I have been hit TWICE by motorists who didn't even bother to notice I was sitting at the red light with them. I took off at the green, so did the car, and turned right right into me.
Driving rules need to be enforced much more closely than any biking rules. I'd like to listen to Menino explain this and then ask him in person what to do when you're hit even AFTER waiting for that red light.

but honestly I agree with Boston Biker on this one; Pedestrians walking in the road, crossing against the light, and jay walking anywhere they feel like it is a bigger problem in Boston.

I routinely have to go to Tufts Medical Center, and Chinatown is a nightmare because pedestrians just do whatever they want.

Can someone explain to me how two days of wages is a proper punishment for crossing a red light with not a soul in sight? How much damage can a bike do to anyone? Very little.

And as I wrote on that website,

"Cracking down" on jaywalking is an idiotic idea. Jaywalking makes the city safer, not less safe, because drivers expect it and are constantly looking for it. That means they drive slower. It's like traffic calming.

Go to LA, where they do enforce jaywalking, to the point that if the timer says 15 seconds in red and you start to cross because you know it will only take 10 seconds, you get a ticket. Compare the environment there to here. There, pedestrians are a nuisance and must be pushed out of the way. Here, we respect walking.

Jaywalking rules were only invented so cars could go as fast as they want and not worry about anything getting in their way. Is that the kind of city we want?

Also, most people have no idea what jaywalking actually means. People barely grasp the concept of unmarked crosswalks, never mind being able to legally cross if the nearest signal is x feet away, or if you're between unsignalzied intersections.