Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jcnagqj wrote

Reply to comment by TonyUncleJohnny412 in What is the rationale when bikers go to the front of a line of cars? by TonyUncleJohnny412

> Bikes are considered vehicles

Statutes that apply to pedalcycles specifically mention pedalcycles, dingdong.
 
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/75/00.035..HTM
 
Click on those words up there and hit control F, and type "pedalcycles" for an example.
 
I can't believe you're this stupid, so I'm going to assume that you're still mad about being made some cyclist's bitch two days later. Get over it and get a life.

1

TonyUncleJohnny412 OP t1_jcnb21y wrote

“Get a life” from the dude arguing with people about PA turnpike road tolls 😂😂😭

1

TonyUncleJohnny412 OP t1_jcnaxck wrote

Funny how you were so adamant that it’s not a “competition” but once you get proven demonstrably wrong that facade completely crumbles lol.

0

69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jcnb8lx wrote

Your entire argument rests on the idea that PennDOT is deliberately and willfully telling people to do illegal shit in their manuals.
 
You have an assumed natural right to move under your own power in western jurisprudence. That which isn't explicitly banned is permitted. The law doesn't need to explicitly say I can filter on a bicycle; if it isn't banned, it's permitted.
 
You keep pretending to not understand this despite an average twelve year old child in Pennsylvania understanding it.

 
You're so mad about a bicyclist passing you two days ago that you're pissing your time away today, two days later, arguing about it. Get a life.

2

TonyUncleJohnny412 OP t1_jcnbqn5 wrote

What part of bikes are vehicles don’t you understand dude? You’re acting like traffic laws don’t exist. I genuinely don’t understand your point. Are bikes vehicles or not?

1

69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jcnbv90 wrote

Do you think PennDOT is intentionally telling bicyclists to break the law in their publications or not?

1

TonyUncleJohnny412 OP t1_jcnckj7 wrote

Nothing in that publication says you can just go to the front of the line at every light my guy. It says in “traffic jams” you can. Jesus fucking Christ.

1

69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jcnd4y7 wrote

The term "traffic jam" has no legal meaning, and the manual offers no definition. The manual is clearly referring to instances where cars are stopped.
 
I can tell that you have no fucking idea what you're talking about because you don't understand this. Terms like "traffic jam" are defined in a legal context when they're used in legal documents. What you think is a "traffic jam" is irrelevant.
 

Do you think PennDOT is intentionally telling bicyclists to break the law in their publications or not?

1

TonyUncleJohnny412 OP t1_jcndu59 wrote

Today I learned that sitting at a red light by myself constitutes a traffic jam. Not gonna keep arguing with someone making clearly bad faith points.

1

69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jcnf03v wrote

> Today I learned that sitting at a red light by myself constitutes a traffic jam.

 
Show me where the state defines what a "traffic jam" is. The definition in your head doesn't count.

 

Your entire argument rests on the idea that PennDOT is deliberately telling cyclists to break the law in their official publications. That is an absurd assertion to make.

1

TonyUncleJohnny412 OP t1_jcps3y3 wrote

Love how you say that what I think a traffic jam is is irrelevant, but then go on to define traffic jam in the most absurd manner possible. 😂

1