I don't have time to read the law! I'm a judge!

[draco664]

Link

A teen riding a unicycle was ticketed by a cop for 'riding a bicycle on the sidewalk' - a fine of up to $100. The teen tried showing the cop an app on his phone that showed the gov's website which showed that he was doing nothing illegal, but the cop didn't want to know about it.

He challenges the ticket in front of a judge. Judge doesn't care what the law says either - tells the teen not to do it again or he will put him in jail.

Teen asks for a jury trial.

Judge goes away and actually reads the law. Comes back. "Dismissed!"

Is it asking too much that the people in charge of enforcing the law actually know the law? Or even be willing to check it?

Or is that just wishful thinking?

[Rapscallion]

Sounds like he took the same course as our personnel team at work. Make the fekker up as they go along.

Rapscallion

[gremcint]

while the judge should have reviewed the law I don't have an issue with the cop, once they start to write the ticket they aren't allowed to stop and he should go no where near the kid's iphone for claims of liability he also doesn't know where the info is coming from. The kid fought it in court just like he should have but I don't know if I blame the cop.

[Greenday]

I can see why the cop would think the kid is full of it. I mean, if you can't ride a bike on a sidewalk, why should you be able to ride a unicycle?

[Nekojin]

I can see why the cop would think the kid is full of it. I mean, if you can't ride a bike on a sidewalk, why should you be able to ride a unicycle?

Because, despite the similarity, the skills used to ride them are very different. A unicyclist is in complete, direct control of his vehicle at all times (and if he isn't, a faceplant is in his near future). A bicyclist, on the other hand, can keep moving while being completely oblivious to his surroundings - the bike's balance through the gyroscopic effect of the wheels can keep him in motion even when he's not directly interacting with the bike at all. I'm sure you've seen teenagers cruising down the street, texting on their smartphones and "coasting" - they're not in control of the bike in any real sense (not steering, not pedaling), but they're still a potential hazard to those around them.

In contrast, a unicyclist has to be in control to go anywhere. He must pedal to move, and he must use body english to maneuver. If he's not doing either of those, he's standing still, and not a potential hazard to anyone.

[HYHYBT]

...once they start to write the ticket they aren't allowed to stop...

Well that's silly. When and why did that go into effect?

[bainsidhe]

Well that's silly. When and why did that go into effect?

I don't know if it varies by location, but I'm aware that parking enforcement cannot take back a ticket that's been started. The policy makes it nice and simple for instances where folks try to argue and weedle their way out of a ticket. Just like carding for alcohol. Once I ask for ID, you'd better produce it, and I will not be swayed by a sob story or argument.

[draco664]

I can see why the cop would think the kid is full of it. I mean, if you can't ride a bike on a sidewalk, why should you be able to ride a unicycle?

Yeah, how dare we expect the people charged with upholding the law to actually know it. I mean, really!

[AdminAssistant]

I can give the cop a pass for not having memorized the rules on unicycles on public sidewalks, as I'm sure that's not a situation they find regularly.

[Greenday]

Because, despite the similarity, the skills used to ride them are very different. A unicyclist is in complete, direct control of his vehicle at all times (and if he isn't, a faceplant is in his near future). A bicyclist, on the other hand, can keep moving while being completely oblivious to his surroundings - the bike's balance through the gyroscopic effect of the wheels can keep him in motion even when he's not directly interacting with the bike at all. I'm sure you've seen teenagers cruising down the street, texting on their smartphones and "coasting" - they're not in control of the bike in any real sense (not steering, not pedaling), but they're still a potential hazard to those around them.

In contrast, a unicyclist has to be in control to go anywhere. He must pedal to move, and he must use body english to maneuver. If he's not doing either of those, he's standing still, and not a potential hazard to anyone.

Quite honestly, I don't buy that for a second. Either you don't ride a bike or you are quite exaggerating. There are reckless people on unicycles also. And if someone on a unicycle isn't moving, that just means they are in the way of walking traffic.

[Duelist925]

Quite honestly, I don't buy that for a second. Either you don't ride a bike or you are quite exaggerating. There are reckless people on unicycles also. And if someone on a unicycle isn't moving, that just means they are in the way of walking traffic.

For the first part: Certainly, there are.

They tend to fall over a lot.

Being reckless on a unicycle is like being reckless while logrolling--you will fall, and hurt yourself. If you're not paying attention, you fall. Period. The same is not true of a bike, thanks to simple physics.

As per the second--in which case the same can be said of any pedestrian who isn't walking, or any bike rider who isn't biking. Just walk around.

[Nekojin]

Quite honestly, I don't buy that for a second. Either you don't ride a bike or you are quite exaggerating.

I haven't ridden a bike for more than short jaunts in probably close to 25 years, but that doesn't mean I've forgotten everything I know about riding them*; they haven't changed that much in that time. I know how easy it is to coast (in all senses of the word) and just not pay attention to what you're doing or what's in front of you. I know how easy it is to ride hands-free - hell, I've seen a rush-hour cyclist cruising along with a latte in one hand and a cell phone in the other (I do think it'd be amusing to see which he'd drop first if he had to brake suddenly).

* It's like riding a bicycle, y'know?

There are reckless people on unicycles also. And if someone on a unicycle isn't moving, that just means they are in the way of walking traffic.

While I'll grant in the abstract that there are some reckless people who own unicycles, I'd defy you to find one. Learning to ride a unicycle is a horrendously discipline-intensive skill. Someone with the dedication and discipline to learn how to ride a unicycle is also highly unlikely to be doing so recklessly in public. One of the first lessons is, "pay attention to your surroundings."

[lordlundar]

(I do think it'd be amusing to see which he'd drop first if he had to brake suddenly).

I'd say either the cell phone or he'd debate it to long and crash at full speed.

That said, while in a legal terms I can't really fault anyone apart from the judge who should have referenced the law before his snap decision (cop doing his job and the accused going through all proper legal options) I do think the cop needs a desk job. It just seems to me like he either has a quota or too much time on his hands. Where I live it's technically illegal to ride on the sidewalks but I have never been fined or ticketed largely because the police see that riding on the road is a death sentence and I'm pretty responsible on my bike.

[HYHYBT]

I don't know if it varies by location, but I'm aware that parking enforcement cannot take back a ticket that's been started. The policy makes it nice and simple for instances where folks try to argue and weedle their way out of a ticket. Just like carding for alcohol. Once I ask for ID, you'd better produce it, and I will not be swayed by a sob story or argument.

Except that's a substantially different situation. Writing a ticket is essentially charging someone with a crime. Asking for ID is simply verifying that a person is who they say they are or is qualified to do what they're trying to do. What happens when (not if) an officer has begun writing a ticket and realizes they were mistaken? There is no equivalent to that in carding someone.

[Jetfire]

It probably depends on the jurisdiction, but I suspect the cop, if they realize the ticket truly was mistaken, would still have to finish it, and then void it back at the station. (and/or get upper management involved to void the ticket). By not being able to cancel the ticket in the field, it probably keeps the process simpler overall, with the paper trail kept consistant and all that.