Bill H.3081 - Motorcycles and Traffic Activated Signals - May proceed with caution

[commuter]

This is active in 189th, sponsored by Tom Sannicandro of Ashland:
(a) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the driver of a motorcycle or bicycle approaching an intersection that is controlled by a traffic-control signal utilizing a vehicle detection device that is inoperative due to the size of the motorcycle or bicycle shall come to a full and complete stop at the intersection and, after exercising due care as provided by law, may proceed with due caution when it is safe to do so.

[nt650hawk]

nice. some light do not pick me up at all. thanks

[SwiftTone]

Dumb question...Is this state wide or just in Ashland?

[Fitron]

Judging by the wording, it looks to be a bill that is sponsored, not voted into law yet. I'd guess that it was for the whole state.

[commuter]

Dumb question...Is this state wide or just in Ashland?

This will be a Massachusetts state law, if it passes.

[Kurlon]

I'm very surprised there isn't already a bit of law that says the same thing for 'defective' lights in general. I know there is in Maine for example.

[jasnmar]

More upsetting is the fact that laws have to be passed so that people won't be fined for doing something logical and reasonable, but small steps are better than no steps.

[Stoneman]

I *BELIEVE* this is already allowed in NH...

[jasnmar]

I *BELIEVE* this is already allowed in NH...

There was a bill introduced for this in 2014 (HB 1365), but it was found Inexpediant to Legilate (i.e. not passed).
I don't see any other allowance for this in RSA 265, but I could be missing it.

[Karate.Snoopy]

Geez I have been running lights for years now :-|, my little street triple isnt' big enough to trip magnet sensors

[Falko]

You have to stop at lights on a bicycle??

[Stoneman]

I *BELIEVE* this is already allowed in NH...

There was a bill introduced for this in 2014 (HB 1365), but it was found Inexpediant to Legilate (i.e. not passed).
I don't see any other allowance for this in RSA 265, but I could be missing it.

I stand corrected. As I said, I thought it was allowed. I said that because I know someone who fought a red light infraction in court under the same situation and got off. But if it's not allowed, per se, very well...

[Stoneman]

You have to stop at lights on a bicycle??

You have to follow the same traffic laws as a motor vehicle, no?

[commuter]

You have to stop at lights on a bicycle??

Not sure if you're being facetious, because so many bicyclists in Boston adhere to NO rules.
Yes, in Massachusetts and California, both states require bicycles adhere to the rules of the road. Exceptions made for children.
For example, Massachusetts does not distinguish between drunk driving of a motor vehicle or drunk riding of a bicycle.

- - - Updated - - -

I stand corrected. As I said, I thought it was allowed. I said that because I know someone who fought a red light infraction in court under the same situation and got off. But if it's not allowed, per se, very well...

You can get the ticket, but a reasonable judge would toss it.

[commuter]

I stand corrected. As I said, I thought it was allowed. I said that because I know someone who fought a red light infraction in court under the same situation and got off. But if it's not allowed, per se, very well...

There's a traffic signal by Tufts that is AFU. Many times, during the rotation of green lights, a pedestrian will signal a walk light. After the walk light, the rotation starts again at the beginning of the cycle and does not pick up where it left off. This can leave traffic waiting for a red light for a very long time. Some sheep will sit and wait for ever for a green light that obviously is not coming. Traffic going around them causes a danger. Can't legislate stupidity.

[jasnmar]

I said that because I know someone who fought a red light infraction in court under the same situation and got off. But if it's not allowed, per se, very well...

Good, at least at some point reason prevailed (sucks that someone had to take a day off work to go discuss the ridiculousness with a Judge, however).
The only options are to wait until a car pulls up behind you or to just run the light.

[Falko]

Not sure if you're being facetious, because so many bicyclists in Boston adhere to NO rules.

Yes, being facetious for the exact reason you state, only not limiting to Boston.

[ZX-12R]

Good, at least at some point reason prevailed (sucks that someone had to take a day off work to go discuss the ridiculousness with a Judge, however).
The only options are to wait until a car pulls up behind you or to just run the light.

Usually it's a courteous driver who leaves you some space and then looks at you weird when you wave to them to pull up closer since they are outside of the loop detector.

[Garrett]

I put a rare earth magnet on the bottom of my moped and that seemed to work. Dunno if anyone's tried it with a real bike.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Kenn157]

Bill H.3081

[Tekime]

I'm very surprised there isn't already a bit of law that says the same thing for 'defective' lights in general. I know there is in Maine for example.

Any idea where this is in the lawbooks? Nothing about lights in 29-A §2062. Motorcycles or §2057. Traffic-control devices

However we do have this little tidbit:

7. Raising wheel. A person may not intentionally or knowingly raise the front wheel of a motorcycle off the surface when operating it on a public way or any place where public traffic may reasonably be anticipated.

Note they only specify the front wheel, so I guess stoppies are A-OK