Corking and CVC 21800
Thread started by
gregb at 09.24.10 - 12:44 pm
C V C Section 21800 Intersections
Intersections
21800. (a) The driver of a vehicle approaching an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle which has entered the intersection from a different highway.
Thus a rider who finds himself at the head of a column of cars at an intersection and wants to enter the roadway ahead of him but finds it occupied with bicycle riders(critical mass etc) who have already entered the intersection and thus have the right of way, and then the bicycle rider decides to sit at the front of the cars and wait until the intesection clears, is not commiting any infraction.
Isn't that what corking is? And isn't this why it is legal? As long as you sit on your bicycle in front of the first car, and are heading in the direction of the cars, you are merely waiting for the intersection to clear
reply
Also CVC 22526:
"22526. (a) Notwithstanding any official traffic control signal indication to proceed, a driver of a vehicle shall not enter an intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side. "
Even if the light is green, if the intersection is occupied, it is not lawful to proceed, and thus it is lawful to sit on your vehicle(your bicycle) at the head of a column of cars at a green light when the road is full of other vehicles(bicycles in critical mass).
gregb09.24.10 - 12:51 pm
reply
Interesting interpretation. But will it hold up in court?
328rides4ever09.24.10 - 1:01 pm
reply
Stop at red duh
V C Section 21453 Circular Red or Red Arrow
Circular Red or Red Arrow
21453.  (a) A driver facing a steady circular red signal alone shall stop at a marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication to proceed is shown, except as provided in subdivision (b).
(b) Except when a sign is in place prohibiting a turn, a driver, after stopping as required by subdivision (a), facing a steady circular red signal, may turn right, or turn left from a one-way street onto a one-way street. A driver making that turn shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and to any vehicle that has approached or is approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard to the driver, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to that vehicle until the driver can proceed with reasonable safety.
(c) A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.
(d) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as provided in Section 21456, a pedestrian facing a steady circular red or red arrow signal shall not enter the roadway.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 14, Stats. 2001. Effective January 1, 2002.
 Â
 Â
Foldie09.24.10 - 1:45 pm
reply
I don't know. IAMAL. TINLA.
gregb responding to a
comment by 328rides4ever
09.24.10 - 1:59 pm
reply
"Stop at red duh"
Not sure what you are responding to. That is another defense for corking yes. If you are sitting at a red light in front of a bunch of cars, there is no reason to get a ticket for corking, you are merely stopping at a red light.
I am giving an argument for why corkers should not get tickets or how to possibly get out of a ticket for corking if they get one. The argument above is not an argument for why you should be able to run red lights or how to get out of a red light ticket, but an argument for how and why corkers shouldn't get tickets if the mass is proceeding through the red lights.
gregb responding to a
comment by Foldie
09.24.10 - 2:05 pm
reply
And to complete my thought, it seems to me, as a non-lawyer, that if you want to cork, and you put your bicycle in front of the cars facing the same direction as the cars, and you have evidence that the intersection was occupied at the time of your citation, you have a valid argument for getting out of any ticket for blocking traffic you may receive. Whether it works is another story...
gregb09.24.10 - 2:14 pm
reply
Nothing is stopping you from moving through the intersection. You are sitting in the middle of the intersection because you want to block traffic.
You know what you are doing is against the law. If you want to justify it by trying to rework the cvc, good luck with that.
Foldie responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 2:24 pm
reply
Let me get my pants off first. Last time you showed me your justification it hurt much more than it should have.
Foldie responding to a
comment by Joe Borfo
09.24.10 - 2:28 pm
reply
I agree it is safer for us ridazz...but lets just not fuck with the system...we are also supposed to stay far right and form a longer mass of cyclists but we take all 3 lanes (or more) at times and we are not really supposed to do that, and we try not to... ANyways they aren't tripping on that..but the corking, I think we can abide by that one no problem.
FIXMYLIFE09.24.10 - 2:48 pm
reply
Even if the cops don't cork? ......
Joe Borfo responding to a
comment by FIXMYLIFE
09.24.10 - 2:50 pm
reply
I don't recall me saying anything about sitting in the middle of the intersection.
I am advocating that those who want to cork sit outside of the intersection, at the side-streets, in front of the cars, and not enter the intersection because it is already occupied by vehicles, as the traffic code calls for. This is not trying to rework the cvc, this is reading the cvc.
gregb responding to a
comment by Foldie
09.24.10 - 3:31 pm
reply
More power to you. Maybe you should become a lawyer.
oops!
I mean, MPTY. MYSBAL.
Joe Borfo responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 3:33 pm
reply
Technically this is correct according to the CVC, but it is still illegal for all the bikes a rider is corking for to enter the intersection on a red.
outerspace responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 3:34 pm
reply
How bout this then.....
V C Section 22526 Entering Intersection Rail Crossing or Marked Crosswalk
Entering Intersection, Rail Crossing, or Marked Crosswalk
22526. (a) Notwithstanding any official traffic control signal indication to proceed, a driver of a vehicle shall not enter an intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side.
(b) A driver of a vehicle which is making a turn at an intersection who is facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal shall not enter the intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side.
(c) A driver of a vehicle shall not enter a railroad or rail transit crossing, notwithstanding any official traffic control device or signal indication to proceed, unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the railroad or rail transit crossing to accommodate the vehicle driven or there is sufficient undercarriage clearance to cross the intersection without obstructing the through passage of a railway vehicle, including, but not limited to, a train, trolley, or city transit vehicle.
(d) A local authority may post appropriate signs at the entrance to intersections indicating the prohibition in subdivisions (a), (b), and (c).
(e) A violation of this section is not a violation of a law relating to the safe operation of vehicles and is the following:
(1) A stopping violation when a notice to appear has been issued by a peace officer described in Section 830.1, 830.2, or 830.33 of the Penal Code.
(2) A parking violation when a notice of parking violation is issued by a person, other than a peace officer described in paragraph (1), who is authorized to enforce parking statutes and regulations.
(f) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Anti-Gridlock Act of 1987.
Amended Sec. 7, Ch. 504, Stats. 2001. Effective January 1, 2002.
Amended Sec. 6, Ch. 716, Stats. 2005. Effective January 1, 2006.
Foldie responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 3:39 pm
reply
and by the way you failed to copy the entire CVC which would make your argument null......
(e) This section does not apply to any of the following:
(1) Any intersection controlled by an official traffic control signal or yield right-of-way sign.
Foldie responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 3:41 pm
reply
How about it? What do you mean?
I already quoted this law above. It seems to agree with my point.
"22526. (a) Notwithstanding any official traffic control signal indication to proceed, a driver of a vehicle shall not enter an intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side. "
Thus even if there is a green light, it is unlawful to enter the intersection if there's no where for you to go, as it would be if you were sitting at a green light while Critical Mass rides by.
gregb responding to a
comment by Foldie
09.24.10 - 3:44 pm
reply
OK
here it is again. Plain and simple.
The cvc 21800 you listed does not apply to intersections with working traffic control devices as listed here:
(e) This section does not apply to any of the following:
(1) Any intersection controlled by an official traffic control signal or yield right-of-way sign.
So you would lose in court if you were using this section as a defense.
Foldie responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 3:52 pm
reply
You seem to be right in that 21800, with all those exceptions, does seem to only apply at 4-way stops.
However 21526 still makes the case for not entering an intersection that is occupied even when the light is green.
gregb responding to a
comment by Foldie
09.24.10 - 3:52 pm
reply
My "how bout it" was in response to your quote of 22526, which supports the case for not entering an intersection even with a green light.
gregb09.24.10 - 3:54 pm
reply
But you can be cited for blocking traffic or running a red because there is nothing blocking you from continuing through the intersection with the rest of the riders.
Foldie responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 3:56 pm
reply
How do you know I'm riding with the riders? Suppose I want to turn around? Suppose I want to make a left? Suppose I then change my mind? There is a mass of vehicles in the intersection and I don't want to enter. I'm not running a red. I'm not going on green because the intersection is full of vehicles.
gregb responding to a
comment by Foldie
09.24.10 - 3:58 pm
reply
I got your number on my wall...
gregb responding to a
comment by Joe Borfo
09.24.10 - 3:59 pm
reply
Try it out and let me know how it goes for you.
I just think it is disingenuous to try to say under the law corking is ok.
if a car were doing the same thing?
or even pedestrians.....
Foldie responding to a
comment by gregb
09.24.10 - 4:01 pm
reply
Cars do the same thing all the time. Rush-hour? They don't enter the intersection because there is no where for them to go. The first car at an onramp on the 110 from Downtown to Pasadena? The first car making a legal right on red but he can't because there are cars coming?
gregb responding to a
comment by Foldie
09.24.10 - 4:03 pm
reply
FYI. The Vehicle code section we use for corking is:
22400. (a) No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of a grade, or in compliance with law.
No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the stop is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.
The second paragraph is the applicable language.
Sgt. David Krumer09.25.10 - 12:32 am
reply
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
