Whats funny is I know someone who has been pulled over for doing this.
Whats funny is I know someone who has been pulled over for doing this.
R.I.P. Lahela 10/12/1986-08/01/2008
Want to become a super hero? http://www.donoralliance.org/info-page-1
"I don't fail I just succeed at finding ways that don't work."
Chris Titus
CSC Spelling Bee Champ 2008 and 2009
Did he get a ticket and if so, what for? Felony stupid?Originally Posted by Tipys
2005 Yamaha YZF-R6 (SOLD)
2013 Yamaha FZ6R
Stupidity should be painful.
i dont think he got a ticket. But he was having a bad day and thought he was at a different light. (one block from where he was with a turn arrow)Did he get a ticket and if so, what for? Felony stupid?
R.I.P. Lahela 10/12/1986-08/01/2008
Want to become a super hero? http://www.donoralliance.org/info-page-1
"I don't fail I just succeed at finding ways that don't work."
Chris Titus
CSC Spelling Bee Champ 2008 and 2009
LOL - I am from Baltimore.. and they just run it during the "red light" too - must be a B-thang!!! and fuck everyone up and then there is some random shootings and bunch of rear endings. then everyone comes outside to see what has happened "What's Happenin!!! Waz Up" and then they start fighting and then it becomes a "Block War!!!! God, I miss B-more.. LOLWould have been a "Boston Left" if the light was still red.I Never needed cable or Netflicks!!!
Nice fj man, got a 07 blue and a 08 blk, nothin related to the thread just wanted to shoot that out......continue----OMG - that happened to me yesterday... Actually I wanted to tag him with my FJ to show the ass what my Brushguard can do to his car... If I hit him - would it be my fault????
Gotta Love the FJs!!! Glad you got one too - they are torque monsters... they are awesome!!!. Let me know if you find the TRD black Special Editions Rims (they are really rare!!!) Sorry
...continue...
Gotta Love the FJs!!! Glad you got one too - they are torque monsters... they are awesome!!!
LOL i have scratched like 3 sets of those. I hate those wheels damn near impossible not to scratch. And you wonder why they are rare.
Plus FJ's are gay anyway
R.I.P. Lahela 10/12/1986-08/01/2008
Want to become a super hero? http://www.donoralliance.org/info-page-1
"I don't fail I just succeed at finding ways that don't work."
Chris Titus
CSC Spelling Bee Champ 2008 and 2009
But that method works only if the person has no kids yet.
Gary
08 CBR1000rr - Candy Dark Red/Metallic Silver
The apple won't fall too far from the tree.
It works! Slow in, Fast out
"Sarcasm is difficult to convey on the internet, especially if the people reading it don't know you personally". By Spiderman
Neither irony nor sarcasm is argument. By Rufus Choate
Be smart, be nice, do what'cha love and always have fun.
Let food be your medicine, and medicine be your food. - Hippocrates
I will use treatment to help the sick. I will never use it to injure them or wrong them. I will not give poison to anyone. - The Hippocratic Oath
42-4-702. Vehicle turning left.
The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left within an intersection or into an alley, private road, or driveway shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction which is within the intersection or so close thereto as to constitute an immediate hazard. Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction.
Source: L. 94: Entire title amended with relocations, p. 2346, § 1, effective January 1, 1995.
This is copied from the Colorado Revised Statutes. He's lucky he didn't get hit,the way cars cut off bikes. In some states it is legal, actually it is common practice in most states back east.
Terry
In the context of the scenario given, the driver made it through the intersection without violating anyone's right of way, therefore not a violation of CRS (Colorado Revised Statutes).
Re: illegal or not?
I was on Wadsworth heading north toward 6th Ave about a year ago... There were three lanes and a right turn lane and traffic was backed up, so myself and the cars on each side of me stopped to let this chick (going south) turn left into a parking lot. Well, some ass clown in a WRX was flying down the turn lane to blow threw the intersection and cut everyone off. He t-boned her at probably 55 mph and it was possibly the loudest noise I have ever heard, then she spun in circles and missed me (on my brand new R1) by no more than 10 feet.
Needless to say, I furious for this guys selfish/carelessness so I stopped and gave my name and number to the girl. The next week I was getting 5 calls a day from her insurance company and her dad who was an attorney. She received the citation because the WRX never made it through the intersection, even though it was very clear he wasn't going to make the turn in the first place.
I don't know the verdict on the incident because I got tired of talking to everyone about what I saw and therefore stopped answering unknown calls. After seeing that happen right in front of me, I'd never do this on a bike, especially if there are any open oncoming lanes, even a turn lane. I've been in Cali for 7 months and I have yet to see an intersection without a red/yellow/green arrow. Yeah, you're NEVER even allowed to turn left if there is NO oncoming traffic at all - so annoying. Happy to be headed back to Golden in 9 days.
-This ends my 1st post on cosportbikeclub
I think a judge would disagree with that. You prevented them from going at the green light. By "jumping out first" you are not yielding the right of way.
Just to quote it again.
42-4-702. Vehicle turning left.
The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left within an intersection or into an alley, private road, or driveway shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction which is within the intersection or so close thereto as to constitute an immediate hazard. Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction.
It could also fit under this statute.
42-4-1402. Careless driving - penalty.
(1) Any person who drives any motor vehicle, bicycle, or motorized bicycle in a careless and imprudent manner, without due regard for the width, grade, curves, corners, traffic, and use of the streets and highways and all other attendant circumstances, is guilty of careless driving. A person convicted of careless driving of a bicycle or motorized bicycle shall not be subject to the provisions of section 42-2-127.
(2) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class 2 misdemeanor traffic offense, but, if the person's actions are the proximate cause of bodily injury or death to another, such person commits a class 1 misdemeanor traffic offense.
Source: L. 94: Entire title amended with relocations, p. 2392, § 1, effective January 1, 1995.
Editor's note: This section was formerly numbered as 42-4-1204 and the former section 42-4-1402 was relocated to section 42-4-1602.
Cross references: For provision that the operation of vehicles and the movement of pedestrians pursuant to this section apply upon streets and highways and elsewhere throughout the state, see § 42-4-103 (2)(b).
This section is applicable and may be enforced in connection with acts of careless driving committed on private property used as a shopping center parking lot. Clark v. Bunnell, 172 Colo. 32, 470 P.2d 42 (1970); People v. Millican, 172 Colo. 561, 474 P.2d 789 (1970); People v. Erb, 173 Colo. 15, 475 P.2d 330 (1970).
One who commits reckless driving necessarily has been guilty of careless driving, for the greater degree of negligence includes the lesser. People v. Chapman, 192 Colo. 322, 557 P.2d 1211 (1977).
Both reckless and careless driving offenses consist of two elements: (1) The act of driving a motor vehicle; and (2) the state of mind in "disregard" of or "without due regard" for safety. People v. Chapman, 192 Colo. 322, 557 P.2d 1211 (1977).
In both reckless and careless driving statutes, the essence of the mental element is disregard of safety in driving. In both it is the absence of care which renders the driving criminal. People v. Chapman, 192 Colo. 322, 557 P.2d 1211 (1977).
The two offenses differ only in that the degree of negligence required is far more culpable in reckless driving than in careless driving, although it falls short of intentional wrongdoing. People v. Chapman, 192 Colo. 322, 557 P.2d 1211 (1977).
The actions of a defendant convicted of criminally negligent homicide may be the same as a person convicted under this section. The enactment by the general assembly of a specific criminal statute does not preclude prosecution under a general criminal statute unless a legislative intent to limit prosecution to the specific statute is shown. Here no such intent is found. People v. Tow, 992 P.2d 665 (Colo. App. 1999).
The same could go for the guy that is holding up a lane of traffic because he didnt go right when it turned green.
Either way they would need to prove that he prevented them from going. Not just hearsay
R.I.P. Lahela 10/12/1986-08/01/2008
Want to become a super hero? http://www.donoralliance.org/info-page-1
"I don't fail I just succeed at finding ways that don't work."
Chris Titus
CSC Spelling Bee Champ 2008 and 2009
Actually, no. The same can't be said. You don't have the "right of way" when you are behind a stopped car at a light. He has no legal requirement to yield to traffic behind him.
There is no "delayed" start from a light law. There is (as quoted TWICE above) a law about not yeilding the right of way for a left turn.
You are ALWAYS required to yield to traffic when making a left. It does not matter that you can gun it across the intersection. It is YOUR action that is preventing them from going SAFELY!. Which makes it illegal, by not "yielding the right of way".
Last edited by Xtremjeepn; Wed Aug 5th, 2009 at 12:22 PM.
A few more supporting C.R.S segments.
42-4-604. Traffic control signal legend.
(I) Vehicular traffic facing a circular green signal may proceed straight through or turn right or left unless a sign at such place prohibits such turn; but vehicular traffic, including vehicles turning right or left, shall yield the right-of-way to other vehicles and to pedestrians lawfully within the intersection and to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk at the time such signal is exhibited.
(II) Vehicular traffic facing a green arrow signal, shown alone or in combination with another indication, may cautiously enter the intersection only to make the movement indicated by such arrow or such other movement as is permitted by other indications shown at the same time. Such vehicular traffic shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and to other traffic lawfully using the intersection.
More:
State legal definition of "Right of way".
(edited out all other definitions for context)
42-1-102. Definitions.(82) "Right-of-way" means the right of one vehicle operator or pedestrian to proceed in a lawful manner in preference to another vehicle operator or pedestrian approaching under such circumstances of direction, speed, and proximity as to give rise to danger of collision unless one grants precedence to the other.
How about this one?
42-4-903. Turning movements and required signals.
(1) No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in section 42-4-901, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway, or otherwise turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in sections 42-4-608 and 42-4-609.
as long as you're not running away with this or anything...
[SIGPIC][SIGPIC]
Just figured I would post all the relative legal information. (just kept finding other relative stuff after each post, and I left the obvious "reckless" out since the "careless" post included it)
Here is the link to a searchable Colorado Revised Statues site.
"Title 42" is what you want for vehicles and traffic.
http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext...=main-h.htm&cp=
Understanding what the laws "really" are can help you not get those "bullshit" tickets.
Last edited by Xtremjeepn; Wed Aug 5th, 2009 at 12:43 PM.
I do it all the time, simply because the lights in Denver seem to have been timed by a mildly, well make that severely, retarded individual. It seems like the intent is to have vehicles stop at almost every light, instead of creating continuous flow of traffic. I just don't get it.
Coming from the northeast, where reducing congestion and traffic flow is a well applied science, the move to Denver made me feel like I was relegated to the short-bus. I make due by jumping lights, making ultra-late turns (as the light turns from red), etc. Otherwise, what could be a 5 minute 2-mile trip is forced into a 20 minute endeavor, even in light traffic.
Denver traffic engineers need to wake-up and realize that not EVERY SINGLE street need be a functional thoroughfare. It is impractical due to the 45/90 degree intersecting grids, and results in less than ideal traffic flow in and around downtown. Instead, they should focus on creating primary arteries, and either limit flow on side streets, or cut off some of the less practical ones entirely.
[END RANT]
Thank you...I recent moved here from NJ and agree with you 100%, and I pull some of the same "risky" maneuvers.
Between the traffic flow, or lack thereof, and fucktard drivers that park in the fast lane, it takes FOREVER to get anywhere in this state.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
.....now KTM 950 ADV!!!
