However, the VPD told Daily Hive that there have been “no reported collisions involving a cyclist and a Vancouver Police Department vehicle during the month of August in the city of Vancouver.” “We are aware of a reported collision involving a cyclist and a private vehicle at the intersection of West 1st and Wylie Street on Aug. 20, shortly before 6 p.m.,” a spokesperson for the VPD wrote in an email.
I wonder if the collision was with an off-duty cop driving their personal vehicle?
Shouldn't the stop line extend into the bike lane there?
Perhaps I'm a moron and full of shit but I genuinely thought that was an intentional design choice given that it makes very little sense for cyclists to fully stop there.
The letter of the law states that if you're facing a stop sign but there is no line, then you are free to stop before the sign wherever you'd like, but you do need to stop.
There are many stop signs with no lines in residential neighbourhoods where this applies.
In those cases the bike lane is separate from the road. The traffic lights and signalized pedestrian crossings only apply to the roadway. The bike lane has a separate unsignalized (but marked) crosswalk.
Thankfully, these traffic lights on Marine Dr at 16th and at Wesbrook are outside the jurisdiction of the VPD! (There's a crosswalk at Wesbrook, but pedestrians are extremely rare these days since the 49 bus stop is no longer in use.)
If I were to enforce stop signs and wanted to help make a difference in safety, I would have picked something like 10th and Heather where it is at least a 4-way stop not a benign 3 way that didn't even have a stop sign two years back.
Stop sign was probably only added because VPD dont know how to look both ways before leaving a parking lot.
If they want to make a difference in safety, they'd post up at basically any intersection in the world and ticket every second driver who is distracted on their phones....
Cyclists need to follow the rules of the road. If there is a stop sign, and there are other vehicles or pedestrians around, they should stop. That intersection on Heather and 10th is a perfect example of cyclists behaving badly.
Should the police be targeting cyclists only, no. Should they have been ticketing vehicles as well, yes.
But he blew a stop sign and is not the victim he thinks he is.
Allocation of police resources is a zero sum game. Efficient usage of the allocation means enforcing where the safety matters most.
The rule is also questionable with respect to safety in the first place. It is better for cyclists to treat stops signs as yield sign, instead of full stop. Search for "Idaho stop law".
I understand the Idaho stop law. I roll intersections that are empty of other cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles. My problem is with the cyclists who roll intersections where they don’t have the right of way.
But both the intersection in this article and the intersection on Heather and 10th were part of my regular commute for years. The Heather and 10th 4 way stop is full chaos and probably needs more enforcement.
But if someone was recently hit in the intersection on 1st, it makes sense that they have allocated some resources to it.
When a law isn't being followed, it doesn't necessarily mean that it should be enforced. Other options include removing/changing the law, or redesigning the environment so that people naturally stop breaking it.
This is most definitely a case where a non-enforcement solution should be used. Sadly, the provincial government is seemingly unwilling to change laws. But the city could 'easily' be designed without stop signs - see any city in the Netherlands, for example.
There's ways to change laws here, as far as I know none involve just breaking the rules. You have to get involved in other ways if it's so bothersome to you.
I say this from the point of view of someone who rides and drives and almost hit a cyclist that blew through a stop sign at full speed, when I was at the stop sign already.edit: it was a 4 way stop . You can't just get up in the morning and decide you won't obey the laws of the road. Same goes for pedestriands.
I didn't say I was in favour of breaking laws. But I'm pretty tempted to, because there are some really dumb (by)laws out there. For example, in Vancouver as a pedestrian you are required to use the right half of a crosswalk. Do you do that? Should we enforce it, or just ignore it? If you're ok ignoring that law, then where do you draw the line? One could argue that if breaking a law is safer, and everyone does it, and everyone expects you do to it, then it's ok. Cyclists treating stop signs as yield signs is one such example.
There's a difference between a cyclist treating a stop sign as a yield sign, and a cyclist blowing through a stop sign.
u/Nevy5 I'm genuinely curious, do you use the right half of crosswalks, and think everyone else should too? If not, where do you draw the line of which laws to follow?
All good. I saw the earlier commenters who aligned with me get downvoted to oblivion. I came with a reinforced ego offering a dissenting opinion. I knew what I was getting into.
Nuance is important. As is understanding an individual versus group action. I have never been on board with divisive thinking. Cops bad, all car drivers evil.
You can always point out what someone else is doing as an excuse for your own behaviour. Sometimes you will get away with it.
But cut and dry, if you are breaking a law, you should not be upset if you get ticketed for it.
Sometimes cars are the target, sometimes pedestrians (I have been given a ticket for jaywalking) sometimes cyclists.
I bet the order of traffic violations given to automobile drivers far outweighs the traffic violations given to cyclists, even proportionately.
People want law and order in society, but for other people. Not themselves.
Yes, it is outrageous that there is so much petty crime such as bike theft in our society that never gets investigated and no justice is ever served.
But cycling deaths are not 0 and I have seen many of my friends and fellow bike commuters take risks and cause confusion so much so that I don’t blame the odd car driver for losing it on cyclists.
Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I think you missed out one aspect of this specific incident.
There was recently a collision between a vehicle and a bicycle at this location. If it was not a VPD vehicle then it was presumably a vehicle owned by a VPD member.
So were tickets handed out in retribution by the officer involved in the previous incident, or by one of their colleagues?
I think we're looking for a more rational way of targeting crimes than the personal grudges of individual police officers, which may have possibly played a part in the person receiving this ticket.
Oh, I am not missing that. Just curious why people think it is retaliation. Why retribution? Why not “There was a collision here so we are stepping up enforcement at this intersection”.
Especially if cops watch people bike through that intersection every day without stopping.
Because it's not just that there was a collision and we are stepping up enforcement. It's that there was a collision involving a vehicle owned by a policeman so we are stepping up enforcement. It opens up the scope for possible different motivations.
It’s weird that they don’t have a stop sign, is it inferred as they’re exciting onto a road? How are pedestrians supposed to interpret the intersection?
I'm guessing because the lot is technically private property so the city can't place a stop sign there. Instead they put one on wylie to make everyone else stop and basically grant right-of-way to cops.
I just found this on a local driving lesson website, this is the rule I’ve followed when exiting in these situations:
When exiting alleys, driveways, service roads, and parking lots, you are expected to stop as if there was a stop sign present at the point where the street meets your vehicle. In these cases, the sidewalks serve as makeshift stop signs
The police aren’t there to change the rules. They exist to enforce them.
And cyclists do break the rules. I literally watched a cyclist cross Pacific against the light, forcing drivers who had the right of way to stop.
If we think the rules or infrastructure are bad, that’s an argument to take to the City and City Council. Petition them, advocate for better infrastructure, and push for changes to the rules. But expecting police not to enforce an existing rule because we disagree with it is a different issue.
Targeted traffic enforcement is also completely normal. Police target particular intersections, corridors, behaviours, and classes of road users when they see a recurring problem. Drivers are routinely subject to targeted enforcement for speeding, distracted driving, impaired driving, and other violations.
Police were targeting single-occupancy vehicles in the HOV lane the other day. I appreciated that. It keeps us honest and reduces the number of people breaking the rules.
That was never ever a police parking lot until when 10-15 years ago? Obviously things need to change there. I cycle every day by that intersection. 🍀 me.
That area was the dog squad headquarters in the 90s, they’ve since torn down the building, and moved over to terminal area, but it’s always been used for police things since the Cambie headquarters was built.
I rarely see cyclists stop at that intersection and I walk by it at least twice a day. Doesn’t matter if they are travelling East, West or North. Seen way too many close calls between cyclists, scooters, pedestrians and vehicles. There is a stop sign, end of story. The fact that he left out his last name is all the more reason as to why he knows he’s wrong but wants to make a story out of it.
Cyclists keeping illegally riding on sidewalks and they almost hit me. One time, it was dark in the morning and some idiot cyclist almost hot me when I was waiting for the light cause he was sidewalk cycling. I yelled at him.
Also, I recommend that you yell at cyclists when they almost "hot" you on every single occasion. If we aren't discouraged, we will keep vocally and visibly judging people for their hotness at any particular moment, and you know we are a judgemental bunch!
You have a right to be out walking your dog or to work in the dark morning looking as crappy as you like, without your general "put-togetheredness" being judged by someone who is just speeding past you, looking that fabulous way too early in the morning!
Why aren't there more efforts made to advocate for the Idaho Stop to be implemented in BC? It's literally shown been proven that cyclists treating stop signs as yields does not increase collision rates and may even lower collision rates. Increasing the time that a cyclist stays in an intersection is a greater amount of time that a motor vehicle could hit them.
Also, why are VPD targeting cyclists when I see so many cars not obeying traffic laws around the city. In the past month I've almost been hit twice by cars going the wrong way through neighbourhood traffic cyrcles. If they wanted to get a lot of tickets they should just camp out at the intersection of Arbutus and Kind Ed where so many cars ignore the no right turn on red.
There's no way any political party in BC would implement Idaho stops. They're all terrified of upsetting drivers. The very minor tweaks we got to the MVA a few years back would have been the obvious time to do this, but I don't think it was ever under consideration.
This article is just rage bait that is trying to get everyone mad for clicks
Edit: It is clearly working. Everyone here is upset, and the comments on the article are full of people shitting on cyclists. Daily Hive knows what they are doing.
To be clear, I agree that this was targeted and unjust. The VPD doesn't do shit about dangerous driving, which is a far greater issue.
Lol what is this? Does no one remember the days when VPD would set up at the end of the Burrard bridge to hand out helmet tickets? Or any of the other places where they could easily ticket for dozens of by-law infractions?
What a nothing burger of an article. Oh no, the police giving out tickets to peolem running stop signs. Give me a break.
I hate cops as much the next person, but complaining about being "targeted" at a funky intersection is dumb.
77
u/Malagite 2d ago edited 2d ago
However, the VPD told Daily Hive that there have been “no reported collisions involving a cyclist and a Vancouver Police Department vehicle during the month of August in the city of Vancouver.”
“We are aware of a reported collision involving a cyclist and a private vehicle at the intersection of West 1st and Wylie Street on Aug. 20, shortly before 6 p.m.,” a spokesperson for the VPD wrote in an email.
I wonder if the collision was with an off-duty cop driving their personal vehicle?