SFPD Announces Yet Another Cyclist Crackdown, Insists It's For Bikers' Own Good

The San Francisco Police Department is once again going after cyclists. The announcement, made yesterday, details a department-wide plan to ticket bikers in what officials describe as high-injury areas. In an interesting twist, this time around pedestrians are also to be on the receiving end of citations.


[Officers] will cite for violations when pedestrians cross the street illegally or fail to yield to drivers who have the right of way. Bike riders will be stopped and citations issued when they fail to follow the same traffic laws that apply to motorists. All riders are reminded to always wear a helmet – those under 18 years of age must wear helmets by law. Pedestrians should cross the street only in marked crosswalks or at corners.

The victim-blaming crackdown, which is scheduled to take place today and several other days this month, is reminiscent of past efforts by Park Station Captain John Sanford to ticket cyclists on the Wiggle. His campaign led to a series of protests along the popular bicycle route, with people on bikes coming to a full and complete stop at every stop sign — jamming up traffic in the process.

The locations of today’s enforcement action are unknown, with SFPD saying only that officers had “mapped locations over the past 3 years where pedestrian and bike collisions have occurred along with the violations that led to those crashes.”

Interestingly, SFPD appears to have learned at least one thing since the widely criticized 2015 crackdown. Namely, this time around the department is going after drivers as well. “Special attention will be directed toward drivers speeding, making illegal turns, failing to stop for signs and signals, failing to yield to pedestrians in cross walks or any other dangerous violation,” the announcement clarifies.

Perhaps they realized that cyclists’ Idaho Stops didn’t cause the 18 pedestrian and cyclist deaths in 2016.

[Photo: San Francisco Bicycle Coalition]

Comments (6)

Hey SFPD: If you’re so goddamned concerned with cyclists’ safety, go police the bike lane on Valencia. It’s an Uber/Lyft free-for-all, as they swoop in and out of our lane on restaurant row. Mission cops apparently can’t be bothered, ensconced in their barricaded station on Valencia.

Do you know all cyclists personally? No, you do not, in much the same way you don’t know all drivers, or pedestrians. And like all groups, there are good and bad. Do you REALLY wish to improve the safety and security of this city for its commuters? Then please, do not tar people with the same brush unless you can qualify your accusation within fact and reason. You have done no such thing. And if you think it is upto others to prove their innocence? Then you’re wrong on that front, too. You made the proposition here, Chad; you grouped people together to suit your narrative. It is for you, the accuser to substantiate your claim - not for your targets to dispute a negative. Have a good day.

GOOD. Cyclists are horrible f*cks. They rarely follow the law, and half the time it’s a bunch of recreational cyclists just playing with their toys in the street. There are laws. They apply to cyclists just as much as they do motorists. Most of these cyclists and ignorant pedestrians are predominantly straight white people from middle America states that keep flooding our city. They are the same entitled F8cks harassing homeless people and pushing a stronger, more hetero, more whitewashed san francisco.

Please take your ignorant and racist hatred somewhere else.

FAO Jack Morse.

‘Bryan’ appears eager to hijack your article in order to use it as a platform for preaching hatred towards people based purely on the following grounds:

. Their elected mode of transport

. Their sexual orientation

. Their skin color.

What are you views on this? I find Bryan’s outburst? Nobody else here attempted to bring race, sexuality and residency status into this discussion. Not only that, Bryan is using these references in a hateful, and discriminatory manner, in my opinion. Straight, white people have as much right to be in this city as anyone else does, and neither are all cyclists “horrible f*cks”. Bryan appears to have a sociopathic chip on his shoulders; the targets of his unprovoked hatred are clearly defined; and his agenda is based upon causing as much division and hatred as he can possibly muster.

I hope this explains my position and I was just wondering what your thoughts were on the subject. Thank you for letting me air my opinion.

“I find Bryan’s outburst?” *  I find Bryan’s outburst vile.

Post New Comment