Hey Berkowitz--I think the best resolution would be some form of acknowledgement by the NHPD--I'm not sure however. Maybe this individual issue should close, but I know of a lot of cyclists who have been hassled for using crosswalks in a legal manner by different officers, and I think it is important that people realize that harassment is not lawful.

What do you think? I guess it depends on how you want issue reporting to work. If just documenting it is enough, that works for me!

you are supposed to WALK your bicycle through the crosswalk or obey the vehicle rules of the road as a bicycle is a vehichle by statute. The officer was right and you were wrong- sorry Streever the cops got u on this one. On another note as I stood on Chapel nad Church with an officer on the Green I counted 9 cars through red lights while NHPD watched.

John Q Public:
Please refer to the relevant statute I posted, 14-286 a, which states--clearly--that cyclists are allowed to ride on sidewalks AND crosswalks, EXCEPT when specifically prohibited by a municipal ordinance.

14-286 e states that crosswalks and sidewalks are NOT the same, and laws which are designated for one are EXCLUSIVE of the other.

Then, check the New Haven city ordinance which bans sidewalk riding--last version of it I saw only lists sidewalks, not crosswalks.

Maybe this seems like a semantic issue to you, but considering that the laws were drafted about 80 years ago and in relation to each other, it seems clear to me that the people who wrote the ordinances would have understood the nuance.

If I'm incorrect in my reading of the law, I'd welcome a clarification.

Hey David,

I think that your documentation of this issue is a data point that can be used later to support systemic behavior and as such can be closed. I agree that NHPD acknowledging the issue publicly would also be a fix. As its your issue I'll let you make the call.

Ben

You really think NHPD reads the laws?? Doesn't matter about the Statutues Its what they perceive as wrong.

STREEVER,

I was curious about people pulling that maneuver...but technically, most crosswalks aren't 4-square contiguous...unless you hopped onto the sidewalk first, you'd have to ride through a corner of the intersection to get to the parallel crosswalk.
...anyhow my problem is with cyclists who are outright red-light and stop sign burners. They give legal cyclists a bad rep.

For the record, the section you're referencing is...
Chapter 248, Section 14-286a (b)

Hey Robn--it's true, but I figure the tiny inch of space isn't that big of a deal :) it is just frustrating to get hassled by a cop who not only ignored the guy driving through a pedestrian crossing (With pedestrians in the street) but then broke 2 laws himself, all so he could get a coffee while on the job.

I agree though--no need to blow through lights/etc. It is important to ride careful, be safe, and show some respect for the law.

(thanks for getting the little (b) i missed!)

I'm pretty sure that crosswalks are designed to transport pedestrians from one sidewalk to it's opposite. To assume that cyclists can leave the vehicular travel lane and pedal through an intersection in order to get to the beginning of a crosswalk and then proceeed.... does not require a rocket scientist to make a determination that this manuver is illegal. There are no ordinances that prevent cars from doing this exact same thing, so I guess they have a legal right to practice this behavior as well?

Bending the Rules: considering I walked my bike onto the crosswalk, you are incorrect. There is a specific statute--please read it, I posted the section above--which states that bicycles are PERMITTED to use the crosswalk.

There is no statute which states the same for cars, so why on earth would you make that assumption?

need some YuTube video for such event

Your dragging cops into a neutered rooster type of catfight. Henny pennying over people walking bikes in crosswalks !? Oh wait, the cop did that. Anything to hide from his sworn duty , bigger and better things to do - don't tie them up and haggle with it.

Wait wait wait; Streever clearly, CLEARLY wrote in his initial complaint that he rode slowly thru the crosswalk, and THEN in response to Bending he BLATANTLY CHANGES HIS STORY to walking his bike thru the crosswalk. WOW, sure makes me wonder if this, like half of what comes from David Streever, is pure BS.

WOW ok, it took reading the replies to understand why the poster and their friends werent ticketed until it was made clear ONLY IN THE REPLIES that these were pedal bikers. I thought the poster was in a car. Clearer postage please.

E, thats Streevers entire game. He writes these scathing accusations so vaguely that the readers are given the impression he's orchestrated. He's smart enough to clearly get the truth across, but manipulative enough to forgo the truth in lieu of whatever caters to his agenda.

I don't know Streever personally, but I know he has been beaten up for no reason by cops. This is traumatizing. And I also know he is right about the crosswalk law. I mention these two things because I think Pants on Fire needs to back up his accusations with highly specific facts that Streever is a manipulator. Since pants on fire as much as says this is a pattern of his, I want past examples, detailed ones, backed up by facts.

I don't take kindly to people beating up on someone and when they beat up on someone who has had the guts to speak up to power, they really make me angry. So, pony up the evidence or apologize to Streever and rescind the nasty smear, please.

Thank you.

Whatever - I personally think the cops had SOMEWHAT right to at the very least say something to Steever and his buddies. I get really peeved at pedal-bikers and pedestrians who abuse the "Share the road" issue. Pedal-bikers need to make up their freaking minds - you can not pick and choose which laws to abide. Pedal-bikers are supposed to be treated as cars...thus, if a car cant go through a red light in a pedestrian path, neither can a pedal-biker. I get so irritated because I often hear from pedal-bikers complaining they have no rights, they get rush over, blah blah blah but God forbid should they be expected to follow the rules when it doesnt suit them. This thread is a CLASSIC case for this! I just wish cops would get on jaywalkers like that - soooooo sick of THAT issue too! SHARE THE ROAD PEOPLE and that goes for all pedal-bikers and pedestrians too!

Guest (who is probably David Streever or one of his close friends), all I've done is cite examples of him doing this. I agree with E that he has done this here, and I point out the inconsistencies between his initial post and his comment. I think its unspeakably ludicrous that you're defending DS against online bullying, as ALL THAT HE EVER DOES is bully people online. If he's suggesting that the cops are singling him out in this case then GREAT, I hope they are keeping an eye on the cyclists who have a proven track record of intoxication and dangerously aggressive behavior. THANKS NHPD!

Hi pants, I ride my bike-as allowed by law-but had dismounted and come to a full stop first for the red. I entered the crosstalk on foot, atop my bike. Sorry that you misunderstood me, not quite sure how.

How the heck does one enter on foot atop a bike aka riding the bike. Stop splitting hairs. You were wrong. Accept it and move on. No sympathy here. Can we please get on with some legit problems? Its posts like these that abuse the system that is meant to help solve problems thus the powers that be who are suposed to acknowledge and do something become immune to SCF. This should not be a place to gripe just to grumble. Thats what facebook is for.

E,
Did you read the statute, which states the behavior you are decrying is legal? Splitting hairs? Riding in the crosswalk is lawful. Parking in a no parking space and running a red light just to get a coffee? Not legal.

I agree what the cop did after-the-fact was horrible and really should have been the only thing addressed here. I feel you are being really petty. Most peoples knowledge is that you walk a bike through intersections within pedestrian zones. Its something that has been inbred in us since we were kids learning how to ride a bike. But, this wasnt posted about the aftermath of cops behavior - your title of the situation is all most are going to see which has a hidden agenda IMO. How about not abusing this system put into place and be honest, up front and address REAL problems. I think the cop did a great thing addressing the issue about you and your friends - its a start for sure. But again, his aftermath was absolutely horrible and yet another setback to what we want to see happening.

E--
the cop did the right thing by ignoring a car running a red light, and then berating citizens who were following all applicable laws? Again, I'd encourage you to read the statute. It clearly states that--unless specifically prohibited by local municipality--cyclists may ride through a crosswalk so long as they do not overtake a pedestrian.

There were no pedestrians in the crosswalk we road through, and thus, we followed the law.

New Haven has no laws prohibiting crosswalk riding. The police officer should not have berated us, should not have threatened to ticket us, and should not have chuckled and relished the thought of me losing a day's wages in order to fight the ticket in court, as he acknowledged that it probably was not a law.

I'm petty? An officer who admits not knowing the law but says he'd write a ticket anyway to give you a hard time isn't petty? The man abused his power and position to be a jerk. I guess you don't think that is a problem, but I am personally appalled by individuals who abuse their positions out of petty motives.

I think you are entirely off-base, and I have to ask you if you aren't just venting some of your frustration about me. The law is pretty clear. A cop who tells you he doesn't know the law, and doesn't care, because he can give you a hard time anyway, is a serious concern--especially one who demonstrates a flagrant disregard for the law.

This content is currently blocked. The content is either under review by SeeClickFix or has been confirmed by SeeClickFix for violation(s) of SeeClickFix Terms of Use (https://www.civicplus.com/terms-of-service). Content that aligns with SeeClickFix Terms of Use will be posted, and content that does not align with our Terms of Use will not be permitted for public viewing.

Anyone else find it pretty questionable that a few anonymous trolls jumped all over this, blindly stating that I broke the law by riding in a crosswalk, but have yet to quote a single ordinance or statute? (Despite the fact that I've posted the actual statutes for them to read?)

support David Streever
the Rat Driver even thinks David is a drunk driver. do not attack David.

Unfortunately David Streever has forced me to point out more inconsistencies in his posts. I have never said that you broke the law. I am suggesting that your story has changed in the 24 hours that you posted this, and that if it only takes 24 hours for you to become inconsistent imagine what discrepancies could have formed since this initially occurred 624 hours ago. Furthermore, I think this tactic completely fits with your modus operandi of misdirection and misinformation that I and many others have seen you use in various venues. Wikipedia tells me that the term troll means an internet term for a person who, through willful action, attempts to disrupt a community or garner attention and controversy through provocative messages. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black, Streever.

PantsOnFire:
I apologize for any inconsistency in my description as a result of typing my message on an internet phone on a touch screen (my home internet was out). I think I wasn't very clear, but I also think you are deliberately looking--out of bias--for some inaccuracy.

From a full keyboard, I was at a red light--stopped--standing and straddling the bike. I walked it forward a few feet into the crosswalk, by pushing off the ground with my foot--by law, that is considered "walking" the bike, again, please check the statute--if you move the bike without pushing the pedals it is "walking" it--I stepped up on the pedals and rode. Regardless, if I stepped forward or not, I was following the law. I had come to a complete stop for the red light, and I rode through the crosswalk with no pedestrians in my way.

Only your need to prove me wrong and your bias is causing you to push and prod and try to poke holes in the story. Ultimately, the cop was wrong, the law is clear, and I take issue with it.

and, please, do tell--what other "misdirection" have I employed where and when? Can you point a single one, or are you just going to continue hiding behind anonymity while making up things?

David - you aren't getting it. The point that *I* am trying to make is that A) you falsely represented what this post was about by your title - which to many would read as a auto driver when in fact you were talking about peddle bikes B) that you are making this thing completely petty, which forces others to then "not care" about real valid concerns when they arise C) keep bringing up this statute thing just to support your petty argument in the first place and D) I have always remained that what the cop did after-the-fact was definitely wrong. Should he have approached you differently? Absolutely, but that is not your main argument and only presents itself at the end of your complaining over something so petty further making "B)" even more of an issue. Stop being petty and lets get on with real problems - yes, like the cop that committed illegal acts.

E:
How did my title misrepresent?

I followed the law, as written. Why should the officer have said ANYTHING at all to me?

Why should he threaten me with a ticket? I did not break a law.

You may think that it SHOULD be unlawful, but there is no ordinance, there is no law. Police officers are not legislators--they do not write laws, they do not create laws. They enforce existing laws.

I don't understand your point of view or your critique of my description of the incident.

please be not ridiculous. if you do not know the law, shut up. if you think Streever wrong, cite the law. it is obvious who is right. if you cannot cite the law against Streever, just keep quiet
not sure why there is such an argument at all

it is reasonable to post complaints after a month
that's why there is statute of limits
the post is very clear - on a bike

..And the Trolls argued til sunrise , where Gandalf in a loud voice says - something about turning to stone .. We all will agree with Mr.Streever here. The cop took a cheap shot and ran to get coffee, then returns to his/her car where he reads on-line editions, of course that's where he saw David's face before , only reason why he harrassed him - Sitting in a car getting race face and furious over accountability

“I'm sorry that after waiting a month to even post this issue, I did so on my smart phone which for some reason caused, not a typo, but an inconsistency in the facts of my story”? Seriously, David? You may have kicked off the ground with your feet, but either way you are blatantly back pedaling. You have gone around for years telling cyclists that the very statute you're quoting now is grounds for them to ride their bikes through cross walks. You initially wrote that this is what you did. Now and only now you specify that you need to stay straddled to your bike and did not use your pedals or crank? Sounds like total BS. Considering you have previously and very publicly stated its okay (and encouraged) to ride through the cross walks I firmly believe that was exactly what you were doing, foot to pedal pushing crank. But really, that doesn't matter. I do it too, every day. And yes, the officer was giving you a hard time for a victimless act (unlike all of the online posts in which you victimize others). What matters is you were not only wrong and have yourself invalidated your initial posts, but that you refuse to admit it and keep raking more BS over this issue as opposed to admitting that your facts don't add up. David Streever does this all the time, and it is dangerous and irresponsible. As far as your form defense of anonymity, first its irrelevant. Regardless of who is writing this the critique is valid. Secondly, it is you who are too cowardly to confront your adversaries even when called out by them publicly, so the argument is moot. You rode through the crosswalk, you NOW admit doing so is in violation of the very statute you obnoxiously recite, thus negating any point in posting this issue in the first place. Thanks for, again, wasting the time of people who are genuinely concerned with problems in the community, as opposed to those addicted to hearing their own voice pathetically pandering for attention.

You are reading a lot more into this than I am writing, and the best part is you know me, have a grudge against me, but have never had the nerve to say anything to my face. Why would you? It is far easier to manipulate the truth and make as hominem attacks on the internet.

You've totally misread me-or I've been unclear-but the recap you are posting is a far cry from how I read my own comments.maybe take a smoke break and chill out?

Streever:
I wish you were honest with this post.

What? I'm being completely honest. I was stopped at a red light. I was straddling my bicycle. I was about 2 feet from the crosswalk.

I pushed with my feet forward, into the crosswalk, and rode through.

That is what I've been saying. I've been badgered, attacked, and interrogated, and I apologize if anything I said was unclear or confusing--but my story is the same.

Regardless, walking it, biking it, pushing it, carrying it?

ALL LEGAL

Please, please, please, please, please, please read the statute that I posted.

I can't honestly believe that any of you are sincere? if you've read the statute, it CLEARLY STATES THAT A CYCLIST MAY RIDE A BIKE THROUGH A CROSSWALK AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT OVER TAKE A PEDESTRIAN.

Is that unclear? Is it confusing? Have you just not read it?

I have a feeling you're just trolling, because the law is clear. I could moonwalk, backwards, while pushing the bike and wearing a SCUBA suit and STILL not be breaking any laws.

Streever:
I just wish you'd be honest and consistent. But your not. You blast people all the time and expect accountability for their actions but do not have the decency to admit to it when you're in the wrong. You back-pedal and cover your tracks, whether on your bike or off. You're a hypocrite to the highest degree. Since you insist on behaving in this manner publicly, then you must be called out on it, publicly. Anonymity is not cowardly, it is prudent. Do you think anyone questioning your judgement wants to be in your line of sight? Anonymous users who are confronting you do so out of self-preservation, based upon the rules you have set.

Level Playing Field:
You are making up nonsense, however.

The Statute I've posted is correct. Do you have a contradictory one?

How am I inaccurate?

I was barraged with attacks and responded quickly, and unclearly, at night time from a smart phone. Again, I'm sorry for any lack of clarity in them, but you and Pants on Fire are reading into my comments and extrapolating additional things I've NEVER EVEN SAID.

What have I EVER done to ANYONE that would make you afraid to just be honest? Can you name a single thing I've done to hurt someone because they disagree with me?

I'm totally comfortable with someone disagreeing with me--but what isn't cool is a barrage of anonymous attacks that are unrelated to my post.

People are claiming that I'm making up the law--I'm not--it is available for free. You should simply read it yourself. You can google the section I posted and find the law for yourself.

The crosswalk at Chapel/Church IS contiguous on all 4 sides without accessing the sidewalk--look:
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-KHGj50XgIQ8/Tle1nRL8zVI/AAAAAAAAAEY/fyXA0uVKivQ/h301/11%2B-%2B1

How is it illegal to ride my bike through that crosswalk with a walk signal and no pedestrians? can you explain that?

It is beyond ridiculous.