Recumbent bicycles · Public discussion

Lawson, MO, bicyclist convicted for "pushing bicycle"

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 12 posts · 1,209 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Recumbent bicycles
Published
12 January 2005
Last activity
17 January 2005
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
12
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,209
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–12 of 12
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Quoted message said:

    Ed Chasteen, a cyclist with multiple sclerosis, was charged with
    "pushing a bicycle" in Lawson, Missouri, population 2300, in an
    area where bicycle travel is prohibited both on the street and
    the adjacent sidewalks of the business district. Local law
    forbids even pushing a bike.

    The judge had taken Ed's case under advisement to study the issues. We
    just found out yesterday that the verdict came back "guilty".

    Below is Ed's own version of the story. Below that, contact info for
    Lawson city officials and links to background info.

    ---

    When Law Loses Its Authority

    By Ed Chasteen

    When civil authority arbitrarily enforces its laws, those laws loose
    their claim to justice. When I was allowed for 14 years to ride my
    bicycle on Pennsylvania Avenue in Lawson and then one morning was told
    by the Chief of Police that it was illegal under a city ordinance on
    the books for 34 years, I became a victim of injustice. When the city
    prosecutor refused to prosecute the ticket I was given and was fired by
    the mayor and city council, justice was denied. When the new city
    prosecutor and the judge employed by the city said I was guilty,
    injustice was done.

    This is the language of Lawson's city ordinances under which I was
    given a ticket for "pushing a bicycle" in August 2004:

    SECTION 225.020: BICYCLE REGULATIONS

    A That no person shall be permitted to push or ride a bicycle on the
    sidewalks or streets of Pennsylvania Avenue from fifth Street to the
    Santa Fe railway tracks.

    B That any bicycles on the streets after the street lights are turned
    on in the evening, must be equipped with lights.

    C That any parent found guilty of permitting any of the provisions of
    this Section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon
    conviction thereof shall be fined an amount not less than one dollar
    ($1.00) nor more than one hundred dollars ($100.00). Ord. No.
    KK169-3,7-7-70

    I fist rode my bicycle up Pennsylvania Avenue in the summer of 1990. If
    I had been stopped by the police on this ride and told that I was doing
    something illegal, I would not have done it again. If I had been told
    at anytime over the next few months, I would have stopped and made no
    complaint. But when after 14 years I was told, my sense of justice was
    offended.

    When I was allowed for 14 years to violate a law that had been on the
    books for 20 years when I first rode into town, that law lost its moral
    and legal authority. When law is enforced arbitrarily, it ceases to be
    law and becomes a tool used by those in authority to maintain their
    power. If law does not apply all the time to all the people, if it is
    not enforced every time its violation is known, then we must cease to
    call it law and know it by what it has become.

    When I hear that some of my friends in Lawson are verbally abused
    because I protest the arbitrary application of law, I am heartsick and
    sad. I want to give up. But I cannot quite bring myself to surrender.
    If I lose respect for myself, how can I expect others to respect the
    notions of justice I hold dear?

    The heart of my objection to the charge against me is that the 14-year
    failure to enforce the law rendered its eventual enforcement immoral
    and unjust. But I also have lesser objections. For one, there are no
    railway tracks that cross Pennsylvania Avenue. So it is not possible to
    know where bicycles are prohibited. Secondly, the only penalty called
    for is that the parent of the offending party be fined.

    My 91-year old mother has a second floor walk up in a Corpus Christi,
    Texas condo. No elevator. She has a new car. She's never home when I
    call her. She holds numerous offices in various lodges and churches.
    According to the ordinance I've been found guilty of violating, she is
    liable for the $75.00 fine and court costs I have been assessed. She
    has a will of iron and could sell ice cubes to Eskimos. I doubt she
    would pay the fine.

    The amount of money I have been asked to pay is small. Why not pay it
    and move on? Against all the troubles and injustice in the world, a
    fine for "pushing a bicycle" hardly registers. When I was a boy in
    Texas in the 1950s, Kitty Kallen had a hit song called, "Little Things
    Mean Alot." She was on to more than she likely knew. Mighty canyons
    have their origin in single drops of water. Over time the steady drip
    of single drops erode the earth. So do single laws misapplied.

    Having said all this and having now talked to my wife and my bike
    riding friends, I have decided to pay the $97.50. I will not in the
    near future ride to Lawson. More friendly places beckon. What the mayor
    and the police chief have won I'm not sure. But they did win. My hat's
    off to them.

    ---

    Ed's email is hatebuster [at] aol.com

    Contact info for Lawson city officials:

    John Tracy, City Manager
    City of Lawson
    PO Box 185
    Lawson, MO 64062
    Phone: 816-580-3217
    Fax: 816-296-4013
    Email: lawsoncityclerk [at] aol.com

    George Green, Mayor
    City of Lawson
    PO Box 185
    Lawson, MO 64062

    More info about the case:

    http://www.mobikefed.org/2005/01/cyclist-with-multiple-sclerosis.html
    http://www.mobikefed.org/2005/01/national-news-picks-up-story-on.html
    ---

    --Brent
    brent [at] brenthugh.com

  2. On 12 Jan 2005 08:48:54 -0800 said:
    Quoted message said:

    Ed Chasteen, a cyclist with multiple sclerosis, was charged with
    "pushing a bicycle" in Lawson, Missouri, population 2300, in an
    area where bicycle travel is prohibited both on the street and
    the adjacent sidewalks of the business district. Local law
    forbids even pushing a bike.

    The judge had taken Ed's case under advisement to study the issues. We
    just found out yesterday that the verdict came back "guilty".

    Below is Ed's own version of the story. Below that, contact info for
    Lawson city officials and links to background info.

    I've often made the point that I'd *like to rally behind people who feel
    strongly about things, if only they could keep their pants on. Let me
    illustrate what i mean by this.

    He starts out pretty good, kinda strong, stresses the same pseudo-legal
    concept over and over which is kinda tiresome, which retracts from it's
    value as a persuasive argument, but then he says this:

    Quoted message said:

    My 91-year old mother has a second floor walk up in a Corpus Christi,
    Texas condo. No elevator. She has a new car. She's never home when I
    call her. She holds numerous offices in various lodges and churches.
    According to the ordinance I've been found guilty of violating, she is
    liable for the $75.00 fine and court costs I have been assessed. She
    has a will of iron and could sell ice cubes to Eskimos. I doubt she
    would pay the fine.

    Whahuh? What does the 2nd floor walk up and new car have to do with
    anything? You were pushing your bicycle because your mother is unavailable
    - perhaps emotionally unavailable? I ask you, why would an eight foot tall
    wookie want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks?! It does
    not make sense!

    Yes, I know he's saying technically his mother is liable, but I think
    this is the precise point where he goes balls-out.

    Whatever, dude. It sucks. You should have politely pushed to have it
    reduced to a warning instead of haranguing the city about it. Once you
    started turning it into a battle between good and evil you lost the ability
    to say, "I realize that the city has a problem that they are attempting to
    mitigate, and i regret that i have unwittingly exacerbated this problem.
    But under the circumstances, given a confusing law that clearly needs to be
    rewritten, and which has rarely been enforced, I plead for some clemency in
    the interest of goodwill."

    Or something. Anything but what he did, apparently.

  3. "Eric Jorgensen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:20050112101922.5ad5dad0@wafer...

    Quoted message said:

    On 12 Jan 2005 08:48:54 -0800
    [email hidden] wrote:

    Whahuh? What does the 2nd floor walk up and new car have to do with
    anything? You were pushing your bicycle because your mother is unavailable
    - perhaps emotionally unavailable? I ask you, why would an eight foot tall
    wookie want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks?! It does
    not make sense!

    Hey no Chewbacca defence on this one okay? 🙂

  4. Eric Jorgensen said:

    ...I ask you, why would an eight foot tall wookie want to live on Endor with a bunch
    of two foot tall Ewoks?! It does not make sense!....

    Let's not go there.

    --
    Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island

  5. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    My 91-year old mother has a second floor walk up in a Corpus


    Christi,

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Texas condo. No elevator. [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    Whahuh? What does the 2nd floor walk up and new car have to do with
    anything? You were pushing your bicycle because your mother is
    unavailable - perhaps emotionally unavailable?

    Uh, reading the OP carefully we note this sentence:

    "Secondly, the only penalty called for is that the parent of the
    offending party be fined."

    And this one:

    "According to the ordinance I've been found guilty of violating, [my
    mother] is liable for the $75.00 fine and court costs I have been
    assessed."

    Heck, I posted the thing twice[1] . . . you'd think we could read it
    once.

    Ed is not referring to his mother in order to provide fodder for
    amusing Star Wars references.

    He's pointing out the absurdity of the fact that the law calls for his
    *parents* to be fined because *he* was caught pushing his bike on the
    sidewalk.

    Ed is in his 60s and his mother is 91 . . .

    Yes, the law is aimed at kids. Yes, it did get a big laugh in court
    when Ed's lawyer brought this up . . .

    --Brent
    brent at brenthugh dot com
    [1] BTW, sorry about that double post--some kind of googleburp . . .

  6. Um, couldn't he have claimed to be _pulling_ his bicycle, and therefore not subject to the law? I have to admit, that's a pretty dorky law. No *riding* on some sidewalks makes sense, but when you're walking your bike, you're just a pedestrian. Are other pedestrian activities prohibited, too? On a sidewalk? I guess from now on he'll have to carry his bicycle on that stretch.

  7. Eric Jorgensen said:
    On 12 Jan 2005 08:48:54 -0800 said:
    Quoted message said:

    Ed Chasteen, a cyclist with multiple sclerosis, was charged with
    "pushing a bicycle" in Lawson, Missouri, population 2300, in an
    area where bicycle travel is prohibited both on the street


    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    Whatever, dude. It sucks. You should have politely pushed to have


    it

    Quoted message said:

    reduced to a warning instead of haranguing the city about it. Once


    you

    Quoted message said:

    started turning it into a battle between good and evil you lost the


    ability

    Quoted message said:

    to say, "I realize that the city has a problem that they are


    attempting to

    Quoted message said:

    mitigate, and i regret that i have unwittingly exacerbated this


    problem.

    Quoted message said:

    But under the circumstances, given a confusing law that clearly needs


    to be

    Quoted message said:

    rewritten, and which has rarely been enforced, I plead for some


    clemency in

    Quoted message said:

    the interest of goodwill."

    Or something. Anything but what he did, apparently.

    Well, what isn't clear just from this article, is that some cyclists
    were turned away with a warning a couple of months before this
    incident. They were riding to a restaurant in the 'no bicycle zone' to
    eat (small town, on of the few restaurants in town). So they did just
    as you said, they took a warning from the police, didn't push the
    point, and just left.

    So then they did just as you said, started a polite dialogue with the
    city and all that. They suggested the city had a real problem they
    needed to solve but maybe there was a better way. And they thought they
    had reached a position of compromise with the city, where they would
    use the ordinance to stop kids from running haywire all over
    Mainstreet, USA, but allow well behaved adult cyclists to patronize the
    businesses.

    After that, the police then turned away another large group of
    bicyclists (planning to drop a few hundred $$$ at a local restaurant)
    and that is when Ed decided to take a stand.

    Now I'm the first to say that Ed isn't exactly in the middle of the
    bell curve of stuff like this. Most of us just cowtow, knuckle under,
    compromise our principles and all that. Ed doesn't.

    But, to be honest, sometimes that is what it takes to make things
    change.

    Talking politely to city leaders got exactly nowhere. Explaining that
    there are better ways to solve the problem went nowhere. Offering to
    do a lot of stuff to help the situation out, for free got nowhere.
    Even after Ed's ticket, when the city manager urged the city council to
    take the matter under discussion and find a better solution, nothing
    happened. When the city's prosecutor declined to prosecute the case
    (essentially because he thought it was idiotic to prosecute a grown man
    for breaking a law so obviously aimed at kids), still nothing happened.

    They fired that prosecutor and hired another.

    Local bicyclists continued to talk, and still nothing.

    All this time, the local cyclists purposefully kept the rhetoric toned
    down, tried to negotiate in good faith, didn't engage in massive
    mail/email/fax campaigns, and so on. Low key, personal, actually
    trying to find a solution that would satisfy everyone.

    Finally, because Ed was taking a stand instead of just knuckling under,
    the story hit the national media. Now the city is being snowed under
    by mail & email from cyclists across the country.

    Suddenly, there is a different story coming from the city and things
    are changing.

    So, yes, Ed's a little out there. Sometimes that's what it takes.
    --Brent
    brent at brenthugh dot com

  8. Quoted message said:

    SECTION 225.020: BICYCLE REGULATIONS

    It's not made clear in any part of the story why this law exists to
    create such a specific "no bicycle zone". Brent, do you know?

    --
    "Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
    to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
    it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)

  9. Quoted message said:

    It's not made clear in any part of the story why this law exists to
    create such a specific "no bicycle zone". Brent, do you know?

    The reason the Lawson city people give is something to do with kids
    dangerously riding their bikes around the business district. One story
    has a kid riding & the sidewalk and hitting and elderly lady. Another
    story has kids riding along the street and "almost" getting hit by
    someone backing out of a parking space (the business district has
    diagonal parking along both sides of the street).

    BTW, one of the points the local cyclists have continually made to the
    city officials is that this is a legitimate problem but there are far
    better solutions available, than just banning every single bicycle.

    It's the old "toy bicycle syndrome" at work. Only kids ride bikes.
    --Brent
    brent at brenthugh dot com

  10. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    It's not made clear in any part of the story why this law exists to
    create such a specific "no bicycle zone". Brent, do you know?

    The reason the Lawson city people give is something to do with kids
    dangerously riding their bikes around the business district. One story
    has a kid riding & the sidewalk and hitting and elderly lady. Another
    story has kids riding along the street and "almost" getting hit by
    someone backing out of a parking space (the business district has
    diagonal parking along both sides of the street).

    BTW, one of the points the local cyclists have continually made to the
    city officials is that this is a legitimate problem but there are far
    better solutions available, than just banning every single bicycle.

    It's the old "toy bicycle syndrome" at work. Only kids ride bikes.
    --Brent
    brent at brenthugh dot com

    This isn't a problem that requires an act of congress to remedy. Surely
    reasonable adults can work this out. My guess is that somebody said
    something that [censored] somebody off and everybody got their backs up. Trying
    to make a national issue out of this probably isn't helpful.

    My advice - Y'all be nice, sit down and work this out. Maybe someone needs
    to admit they were wrong about something or make an apology for what they
    said (doing this is becoming a requirement in our culture). Maybe the
    restaurant owner who is missing out on his Saturday morning breakfast trade
    might be the reasonable voice that brings everyone together. There is a
    solution somewhere to be found in Lawson.

    skip

  11. I wanted to ride my Gold Wing motorcycle (as quiet as a car) down to Pebble
    Beach in
    Calif (it is a private road, all 17 miles).. they solved the
    loud motorcycle problem by banning all motorcycles. It's just easier to
    enforce. Same with some parks. Ban them all..

    And, it makes things a lot easier. No ''well, you let him ride in, why not
    me
    (potato, potato, potato)...''
    ..
    Arne, USA

    --
    ..
    NoBodyHome
    ..

  12. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    It's not made clear in any part of the story why this law
    exists to create such a specific "no bicycle zone". Brent,
    do you know?

    The reason the Lawson city people give is something to do
    with kids dangerously riding their bikes around the business
    district. One story has a kid riding & the sidewalk and
    hitting and elderly lady. Another story has kids riding
    along the street and "almost" getting hit by someone backing
    out of a parking space
    ...
    one of the points the local cyclists have continually made
    to the city officials is that this is a legitimate problem

    It sure doesn't sound like a legitimate problem: it sounds like a
    high-handed solution in search of a problem.

    --
    "Surely investigation is better than unthinking faith.
    Surely reason is a better guide than fear."
    -- R.G. Ingersoll

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.