QuestionMan
100 W
- Joined
- May 10, 2013
- Messages
- 266
I would like to keep this post to factual posts and not about the morality of committing a crime of riding in prohibited areas.
So it would seem that a private citizen in New York can stop and hold you for riding a bike in a park.
Let me warn you: answers on legal questions are often not clear-cut. Much of law is opinion, and even experienced practitioners of law often disagree. The answers are even worse when they come from people who know nothing.QuestionMan said:If you are riding an e-bike in a park where bikes are not allowed, what kind of force could park police use to stop you?
Nehmo said:I'll answer one part. No, the arresting party cannot use deadly force (causing a bike wreck would be ruled deadly) to apprehend or prevent the flee of the offender.
The first time I started using my ebike I said these things should be illegal because of what they are capable of doing.
Also, PoliceMisconduct.net: The Cato Institute's National Police Misconduct Reporting ProjectLessss said:To educate yourselves on how cops REALLY behave
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut/new/
http://www.reddit.com/r/forfeiture
http://www.reddit.com/r/puppycide
http://www.reddit.com/r/AmIFreeToGo
Drunkskunk said:If you're riding an ebike at 35mph illegaly through a park where you can be seen, then you are an idiot giving all ebikers a bad name. You may be opperating the bike in a safe manor, but some overprotective mother sees you flying by 20 yards away from her 3 year old kid, and she'll be screaming at City Hall to ban all ebikes forever.
You misunderstand how to participate in a thread, arkmundi. If you make a joke, identify it as such. Otherwise people will think you are serious. That is pretty funny, though.arkmundi said:If you disagree with the law, then work with your legislature to change it.
Government establishment people, like pigs (my apologies to real pigs), who don't believe in the concept of limited government, like to say anything people do is a "privilege" ("A drivers license is a privilege; not a right", a cop might say as he or she justifies locking up someone and stealing their car, for example.) But there is no legal basis for this semantic diminishing of the people's rights. Yes, being on the road is a necessity and a right. You can call it a non-enumerated right belonging to the people if you want a US constitutional basis*, but this right is more fundamental than that. I would say natural law allows freedom of movement. Thus, the road is ours without the consent of the government.Rassy said:Don't spoil our privilege
Nehmo said:Government establishment people, like pigs (my apologies to real pigs), who don't believe in the concept of limited government, like to say anything people do is a "privilege" ("A drivers license is a privilege; not a right", a cop might say as he or she justifies locking up someone and stealing their car, for example.) But there is no legal basis for this semantic diminishing of the people's rights. Yes, being on the road is a necessity and a right.Rassy said:Don't spoil our privilege
"A drivers license is a privilege; not a right"
Nehmo said:But there is no legal basis for this semantic diminishing of the people's rights. Yes, being on the road is a necessity and a right. You can call it a non-enumerated right belonging to the people if you want a US constitutional basis*, but this right is more fundamental than that. I would say natural law allows freedom of movement. Thus, the road is ours without the consent of the government.
A right is something you have inherently.
A privilege is something only the government can bestow upon you.