Getting told "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is also such bullshit, for non-experts. Cops should have at LEAST as much training and testing as Barbers or hair dressers and they don't.
They do. This is in Germany, the training time for a police officer is 2 to 3 years (depeding on the position and the state).
I'm not here to defend the police. I am a left winger who went to quite a few demonstrations in his life and there were some interactions I had with the police that were not exactly pleasant.
That being said, there is no comparison between the US police and the German police (and I was in the US often enough to judge not only by the common stereotypes). The whole vibe is different. Their official slogan is "your friend and helper" which I think is kind of cute and most of them take this seriously.
This is certainly not the proudest moment of the officer but the idea that cyclist have to push their bike is a very common misconception here. The whole time he was cool about the situation and when proven wrong he told him what to do to get rid of the ticket easily.
when proven wrong he told him what to do to get rid of the ticket easily.
The subtitles are going at a million miles an hour so it wasn't clear, but it looks like when proven wrong he just have the guy the number for his superior and was like "go take it up with him". That might result in the ticket getting turned over, but it was more just a "not my problem, take it up with the judge" moment
IANAL but my understanding is that the officer can't just take back the ticket once it's issued. This is now an official executive act and has to be treated accordingly. Also, he shouldn't change his mind just because someone is showing them somthing on their smartphone. To me the tone of this conversation was "call there and it will be resolved quickly."
We have bike lanes in my neighborhood. And bikes are considered pedestrians if they aren't motorized and able to keep up with traffic. I live in the middle of a block and am technically jaywalking to get my mail.
Its also a pretty busy street during the day so I check my mail between 8pm and 4am. Dont want to get a ticket, run over, walk to the only end of the block where there is a crosswalk or stand in the rain for 10 minutes just to get my mail.
There. I'm good now. Sometimes you just need to vent.
Jaywalking may technically be a crime. But that’s something that is usually overlooked unless you are doing it in such a way that causes a dangerous situation.
The same goes for other crimes. Throwing something unwanted at somebody is technically battery. But if you threw a wiffle ball or something super light at someone, that almost certainly is not going to be prosecuted.
The only reason I mentioned it is because I know people who have been warned and others who got tickets. I think it depends on the officer and the mood.
How likely it is that someone fakes a website isn't the question. If it would be theoretically possible to find the appropriate law (probably through other websites) then look up the paragraph on an official website and interpret it properly as a layman also isn't the question. And, to be honest, that you think in those terms make you sound uneducated (just kidding, coming to a conclusion like that from such a discussion would be really stupid and making such a comment would be really rude).
He made an official administrative act. To get rid of it, another offical administrative act is necessary. There are rules, laws and processes that have to be followed. Those processes do not include interpretating the law at the corner of the street based on content shown on the smartphone of the culprit.
For me the tone of the converation is very clear, he convinced the police officer and the police officer is telling him the next best step to get rid of the ticket. Just convincing the officer is not enough to satisfy the processes. He would have to apply the appropriate scrutiny, use offical police software, fill out documents, maybe write a statement. I have never heard that someone could talk himself out of an already issued ticket right then and there. In Germany, it always involves at least calling someone.
Now, there are certainly some problems you could identify here. Is all that scrutiny really necessary for a 10€ ticket? Is it fair that the processes for writing a ticket are so much simpler than those for getting rid of a ticket? But those are different discussions, having very little to do with this particular police officer.
I mean, I don't read it that way for a few reasons:
Why isn't the officer doing it? "Hey man, you made a mistake about the law" could be met with "oh yea, look at that, let me handle the ticket for you" and then the officer contacts his own superior. That's also much more likely to work than some random guy calling an officer's superior.
You could have done this before issuing the ticket. "Hey man, that's not the law" could be met with "you know what, I'm just doing minor traffic violations right now so there's no emergency. I'll give you time to look up the law on your phone and show it to me, rather than sit here and argue about it. If you're correct, I won't write the ticket".
Typically, once a ticket is in the system, the police can't usually unilaterally dismiss it without going to court first. Granted, I'm not a German lawyer and not familiar with their system, but that's usually an anti-corruption measure so police commissioners can't just fix tickets for their friends. I'd be shocked if it wasn't similar for Germany.
The officer never actually said "this guy will fix it" did he? Again, subtitles are lightspeed here, but he just immediately directs the complaining guy to his supervisor. I don't know, that's just a classic "I don't want to deal with this" move from an argumentative cop who just found out they're in the wrong. It could be like you said, but I think that's a clean 50/50 coin flip
"there is no comparison between the US police and the German police"
Not these days. But quite a reasonable comparison between German 'police' from just under 100 years ago and US police today. Well, the Gestapo were more disciplined...
It’s also a deliberate decision (at least in the US). They went to court to defend a discrimination claim made by a well-qualified candidate who was denied the job. The winning argument was that the job is too boring to hire intelligent people, and they have too much turnover if they do. So they deliberately hire less intelligent people, arm them to the teeth, and then train them to shoot anything in sight if they “feel scared.”
Not resources, cash. This has deleterious effects, as anyone looking at US policing can see. It is a net negative on our community’s resources, it just requires less money via taxes to fund. And that keeps more money from rich people (those in power) out of the tax pool, which is why they don’t care about the negative effects we see in our day-to-day life from this approach to policing.
The choices were between taxing the wealthy and not buying cops tanks to play with so we could afford a safe and effective police force or explicitly hire people who will be worse at the job and make sure they have all the military hardware they could want. And you think the second option was the "responsible use of public resources."
What are you talking about? People don't try to get into law enforcement on a job-hopping spree in between Starbucks and Walmart, it takes months to get into even the shitty training program, let alone actually on the force. The only "leaving soon" that happens is washing out, not because they finally got their dream accounting job.
I hear you only need 2 brain cells to rub together and make a spark. I also hear orange cats all share one. I know, random. But I learned that from an orange cat owner.
I mean, some countries, like my home country Finland, require a legitimate degree (equivalent level to engineers etc, with a "study point" value of 180 with each point being worth about 27 hours) as training.
Trust me, they know the laws surrounding pedestrians and cyclists and a whole lot more. 😂
I know it’s a pretty low bar but at least he didn’t shoot the guy so that’s a win. That kind of exchange in many parts of the US would have landed the cyclist in the back of a cruiser or even in the morgue with six warning shots to the back.
Gee, if only there were a device that could search laws based on keywords...
I know the cops all carry smartphones and have connected laptops in their cars, but apparently the phones only operate Candy Crush and Grindr while the laptops are always on Facebook whenever I have seen them...
not sure who downvoted you but this is true. My partner is a lawyer, was a public defender. She would actually come to me about stuff related to vehicle code because despite just being a car enthusiast and not a lawyer, have actually read more into it than she has.
The officer should have considered the intent of the “law” he though he was enforcing. The intent of that law would be to keep pedestrians safe. Were any pedestrians at risk of being harmed by this cyclist? No. At that point he probably should have just let it slide. Especially if he is not confident he actually knows the law he’s trying to enforce.
But then his ego got in the way and he doubled down.
German officer who was wrong: oh, oops, here speak with my boss
US officer who was wrong: GET DOWN ON THE GROUNDS WITH YOUR HANDS UP AND BEHIND YOUR BACK WHILE DOING JUMPING JACKS pew pew SHOTS FIRED, I REPEAT SHOTS FIRED, SUSPECT IS RESISTING ARREST! SUSPECT DOWN!
Yeah, lol. I just watched a video an hour ago where two or three officers yelled conflicting orders to someone at gun point. He was charged for resisting arrest...
I do not need to specify the country where this happened, right?
"The delinquent ran away from me in a menacing manner, turning his back on me in such a way that I feared for my life. That's why I felt compelled to empty my magazine into him, the elderly lady crossing the street next to him, and the teenager turning burgers inside the McDonald's behind him."
"You did the right thing, son, but first take some paid leave until things calm down. Worst case scenario, we'll have to let you go, but then you can always go back to working as a police officer in the next town."
Germany has a really bad police brutality problem that‘s being brushed under the rug. Thankfully they aren‘t as trigger happy US cops when it comes to guns, but they like to to punch, kick and drag women, the elderly and even handicapped people during lawful protests. You can find countless videos on that on instagram or here.
Interestingly, the cyclist is allowed to cross the crossing lane while being on the bike. But since he isn't a pedestrian, he has no right of way and instead needs to wait for any cars to pass , while cars have to wait for pedestrians to cross. When the cyclist forces cars to wait because he crosses before they pass, its a Ordnungswidrigkeit
I drive in Hamburg, Germany. And almost every day, cyclists blast their way across a zebra stripe without slowing or signaling in any way. Let alone giving the cars the right of way.
There’s only two types of people who become cops. Actual altruists, and pieces of shit with authority complexes. The altruists don’t last long. Pieces of shit are all that’s left running the show.
It’s just like politicians. You have to have the desire to control people inherently to even want the job.
In this case: you can't know perfectly all the rules and it made kind of sense that cyclists wouldn't go into crossings like that. Also, add that every single time a cop hands a ticket, they are gonna listen to all the excuses. They get trained by the common public to shut down any debate, otherwise they would be arguing more than policing, and they would be taken advantage of.
It also makes sense from an efficiency point, he has taken a decision, he can't stop every single time the decision is disputed. Instead, they send it to their superiors.
Could they be nicer about it? Yes. Absolutely. But again, they are facing the general public. Ask any public facing worker what they think about clients in general, and these guys don't have clients, have people that allegedly have broken the law in some way and are now confronted with the consequences.
Who wouldn't grow callous?
(Me, me I wouldn't. I'd be fired within a month, everyone would be taking advantage of me being nice and I wouldn't bring back those tasty tasty fines to my superiors)
In Belgium the police officer would be completely right. Cyclists need to dismount and walk besides their bike when crossing such intersection. Car drivers do not need to give way to cyclist on such intersection.
Don't know for sure for Germany but i'll look it up.
The biker does not argue that he has priority over cars. He would have priority over cars if he dismounted and walked his bike. His argument is that there were no cars and he is not required to dismount (he only is if he wishes to have the same status as a pedestrian and take priority over any cars)
If you join an institution, you become structurally motivated to think like that institution. Your pay depends on it, the pay of your superiors depends on it, the existence of the institution depends on it.
But maybe more importantly you are invested with a power, and that power only exists insofar as you use it. A power that you don't use is not a real power. So people invested with a power are motivated to use it because otherwise that power doesn't exist and their role is only theoretical. This is why even unpaid volunteers will let power go to their heads, because without its use it is not power.
He didn’t do shit, he told him to contact his superiors. Didn’t admit a mistake didn’t dispute he was full of shit, just go ahead and throw his ignorance to someone else to deal with it
You only see very small parts of the interaction but from the vibe and tone I'm getting (I am German), he did realize the mistake but once he has given the ticket he cant take it back. Calling his superior will most likely resolve the situation.
If this was in the US, the cyclist would have been violently detained, likely after being face planted by a scared tyrant, pummeled several times with fists and elbows because…. Well, officer safety of course… and if he resisted beyond verbally, tased, handcuffed, possibly shot, and berated for getting blood on the poor officers shit.
Damn. All that arguing and then the cops hits him with "that will be a 10 euro fine" I was like "holy shit! This conversation probably cost more then the fine. (Not saying he should just pay if he's not in the wrong.)
Pretty sure in the US they would have been talking about arrests and bring them up on charges of disorderly conduct with a side of concussions and taser burns.
AFAIK the cyclist needs to get off the bike to be treated as a pedestrian (like the woman you see on the lower left corner at the very start of the video) to cross traffic otherwise they are under the same rules as a motor vehicle IE cant drive on a crosswalk
AFAIK the cyclist needs to get off the bike to be treated as a pedestrian
Correkt.
But they can still cross as a cyclist, they just don't have priority like a pedestrian does. The guy in the video actually does a perfekt job of explaining it. :)
He was so close when he agreed pedestrians have the right of way... Meaning they take precedence over any other things that also want to use the same walkway.
I mean, by that logic would a car also be allowed to drive across the walkway?
I don’t know about UK traffic law, but here in Norway cyclists are counted as vehicles and have to follow the same rules that cars do, unless specifically allowed like separate bike lanes etc. they are only counted as pedestrians if they get off their bike. Following that logic a car would be allowed to do the same as a cyclist unless otherwise specified
If a law says "motor vehicles are not allowed on walkways" that does not mean 'motor vehicles must yield right of way to pedestrians before entering the walkway.' It means "motor vehicles are NOT allowed on walkways"
If a law says "motor vehicles must yield right of way to pedestrians on walkways" it means motor vehicles ARE allowed on the walkways, as long as it doesn't hinder a pedestrian's ability to do so.
I've yet to read the words "by that logic" on Reddit and have the following text in any way demonstrate the writer understands the logic presented. It almost always follows someone throwing my words in a blender, and trying to argue against what came out. In that regard, you did better than most. But it did still fall short.
Cars are allowed to drive on the crossing. They obviously are not allowed to drive up on the sidewalk though unlike cyclists.
In Norway, cyclist are allowed to ride on the sidewalks as long as they ride slow. They are certainly not treated exactly like cars, even when riding on a road with no bike lane. One such law is Vegtrafikkloven § 18.1, the rule that specifically allows bicycles to pass on the right of cars (not bicycles).
Yes, which confirms my statement that cyclists are considered as vehicles unless specified otherwise.
As for crossing walkways in Norway, cyclists do have to get off their bike in order for them to be considered as pedestrians and have the right of way. If a cyclist crosses the walkway without getting off the bike and forces cars to give way, they have broken the law. If they want to ride their bike across the walkway, they need to give way for other cars just like a regular intersection, because they are then treated as if they were driving a car.
Reread the original post that you replied to. The cop agrees that the pedestrian has the right of way but falls short of realizing that just because the pedestrian has the right of way they are not the only ones allowed to use the crosswalk. The poster only pointed this out.
This in no way implies that cars suddenly are allowed to drive up on sidewalk and cross the sidewalk.
I wish our cops could be wrong like that. When a German cop is wrong a citizen has to fight an unjust 10€ fine. When a US cop is wrong citizens often die.
A bicycle is neither a car nor a pedestrian. If a cyclist wants to cross the road at a zebras crossing, they don't enjoy the same privileges as a pedestrian - but of course they can still cross the road!
That's all this video is about. Not sure why you're arguing about cyclists not following traffic laws or switching things up, that reads like you're just making stuff up to get mad about.
I lived and cycled in Germany in the early 90s. German cyclists are something else altogether - insufferable doesn’t quite do them justice. Who knows, maybe they’ve mellowed in the intervening 30+ years and are indeed now merely insufferable.
I actually stand with the police officer. Where I'm from it is, in fact, illegal to ride a bike across a pedestrian crossing and on sidewalks, unless they are specially designed for cyclists. I don't know how it is in Germany but I would suppose they have it very similar, and even if they don't, the officer handled it right by giving him the supervisor's number...
Just because it is illegal in your country doesn't mean it's illegal everywhere.
In my country, the law is actually not clear about whether cyclists are allowed to cross on a crosswalk while on their bike.
If they are walking besides their bike, they are allowed to cross and have right of way like a pedestrian. That part is easy.
If they're on their bike, though? That's unclear. Maybe they are allowed as long as they give way, or maybe they're not allowed at all. It's a never ending debate.
I tried to imply that I would presume similarity between my country and Germany ( neighboring countries ) but of course, you are right. I probably didn't write my thoughts clearly enough..
Hey /u/Extreme_Design6936, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our rules.
Join our Discord Server!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Two Germans arguing about the rules. This had the potential to last for years and slow the earth’s orbit, like the damn in China
At least it’s not the US because the cop would have just started blasting
"HE IS JAYWALKING!! GET DOWN!!"
Blam blam
ACORN! ACORN! ACORN!
😂 i forgot about that guy
Don't shoot! He's not Black!
It’s because we can’t read in the US.
He isn't black, so the guy would've just gotten away with a stern beating as long as it was his first offense.
I hate that they don't need to know the laws that they enforce.
But we need to!
Getting told "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is also such bullshit, for non-experts. Cops should have at LEAST as much training and testing as Barbers or hair dressers and they don't.
They do. This is in Germany, the training time for a police officer is 2 to 3 years (depeding on the position and the state).
I'm not here to defend the police. I am a left winger who went to quite a few demonstrations in his life and there were some interactions I had with the police that were not exactly pleasant.
That being said, there is no comparison between the US police and the German police (and I was in the US often enough to judge not only by the common stereotypes). The whole vibe is different. Their official slogan is "your friend and helper" which I think is kind of cute and most of them take this seriously.
This is certainly not the proudest moment of the officer but the idea that cyclist have to push their bike is a very common misconception here. The whole time he was cool about the situation and when proven wrong he told him what to do to get rid of the ticket easily.
I'm following and with you up until:
The subtitles are going at a million miles an hour so it wasn't clear, but it looks like when proven wrong he just have the guy the number for his superior and was like "go take it up with him". That might result in the ticket getting turned over, but it was more just a "not my problem, take it up with the judge" moment
IANAL but my understanding is that the officer can't just take back the ticket once it's issued. This is now an official executive act and has to be treated accordingly. Also, he shouldn't change his mind just because someone is showing them somthing on their smartphone. To me the tone of this conversation was "call there and it will be resolved quickly."
“He shouldn’t change his mind just because someone is showing them something on their smartphone”.
Ummmm what?????
He sure as hell should change his mind if the guy is clearly showing him the law that shows that he is wrong.
He shouldn’t be issuing tickets when he clearly does not confidently know the law.
We have bike lanes in my neighborhood. And bikes are considered pedestrians if they aren't motorized and able to keep up with traffic. I live in the middle of a block and am technically jaywalking to get my mail.
Its also a pretty busy street during the day so I check my mail between 8pm and 4am. Dont want to get a ticket, run over, walk to the only end of the block where there is a crosswalk or stand in the rain for 10 minutes just to get my mail.
There. I'm good now. Sometimes you just need to vent.
Jaywalking may technically be a crime. But that’s something that is usually overlooked unless you are doing it in such a way that causes a dangerous situation.
The same goes for other crimes. Throwing something unwanted at somebody is technically battery. But if you threw a wiffle ball or something super light at someone, that almost certainly is not going to be prosecuted.
The only reason I mentioned it is because I know people who have been warned and others who got tickets. I think it depends on the officer and the mood.
A random website is not prove. They can have errors.
He did go home in the meantime. I can create a legit looking fake law website in 30 minutes.
How do you know that he was showing him a “random website”?
You sound uneducated. You realize that you can look up laws/ordinances directly on government websites, right?
It’s insane that you think he would be showing him some “fake website” just to avoid a 10 Euro ticket. Get real.
It’s not about the money, it’s about the principle.
How likely it is that someone fakes a website isn't the question. If it would be theoretically possible to find the appropriate law (probably through other websites) then look up the paragraph on an official website and interpret it properly as a layman also isn't the question. And, to be honest, that you think in those terms make you sound uneducated (just kidding, coming to a conclusion like that from such a discussion would be really stupid and making such a comment would be really rude).
He made an official administrative act. To get rid of it, another offical administrative act is necessary. There are rules, laws and processes that have to be followed. Those processes do not include interpretating the law at the corner of the street based on content shown on the smartphone of the culprit.
For me the tone of the converation is very clear, he convinced the police officer and the police officer is telling him the next best step to get rid of the ticket. Just convincing the officer is not enough to satisfy the processes. He would have to apply the appropriate scrutiny, use offical police software, fill out documents, maybe write a statement. I have never heard that someone could talk himself out of an already issued ticket right then and there. In Germany, it always involves at least calling someone.
Now, there are certainly some problems you could identify here. Is all that scrutiny really necessary for a 10€ ticket? Is it fair that the processes for writing a ticket are so much simpler than those for getting rid of a ticket? But those are different discussions, having very little to do with this particular police officer.
I mean, I don't read it that way for a few reasons:
Why isn't the officer doing it? "Hey man, you made a mistake about the law" could be met with "oh yea, look at that, let me handle the ticket for you" and then the officer contacts his own superior. That's also much more likely to work than some random guy calling an officer's superior.
You could have done this before issuing the ticket. "Hey man, that's not the law" could be met with "you know what, I'm just doing minor traffic violations right now so there's no emergency. I'll give you time to look up the law on your phone and show it to me, rather than sit here and argue about it. If you're correct, I won't write the ticket".
Typically, once a ticket is in the system, the police can't usually unilaterally dismiss it without going to court first. Granted, I'm not a German lawyer and not familiar with their system, but that's usually an anti-corruption measure so police commissioners can't just fix tickets for their friends. I'd be shocked if it wasn't similar for Germany.
The officer never actually said "this guy will fix it" did he? Again, subtitles are lightspeed here, but he just immediately directs the complaining guy to his supervisor. I don't know, that's just a classic "I don't want to deal with this" move from an argumentative cop who just found out they're in the wrong. It could be like you said, but I think that's a clean 50/50 coin flip
So, you've seen the "do you know who i am?" move?
"there is no comparison between the US police and the German police"
Not these days. But quite a reasonable comparison between German 'police' from just under 100 years ago and US police today. Well, the Gestapo were more disciplined...
100 years ago he'd have been cuffed and stuff in Germany.
The thing is, every person with at least 10 brain cells knows it's a very hard and shitty job
So they're left with 9 braincells or less
(While this is a joke, it's true, unattractive jobs have to hire less desirable employees, beggars can't be choosers)
It’s also a deliberate decision (at least in the US). They went to court to defend a discrimination claim made by a well-qualified candidate who was denied the job. The winning argument was that the job is too boring to hire intelligent people, and they have too much turnover if they do. So they deliberately hire less intelligent people, arm them to the teeth, and then train them to shoot anything in sight if they “feel scared.”
Wow. At least it's honest
[deleted]
Not resources, cash. This has deleterious effects, as anyone looking at US policing can see. It is a net negative on our community’s resources, it just requires less money via taxes to fund. And that keeps more money from rich people (those in power) out of the tax pool, which is why they don’t care about the negative effects we see in our day-to-day life from this approach to policing.
Money is not the only value that matters.
The choices were between taxing the wealthy and not buying cops tanks to play with so we could afford a safe and effective police force or explicitly hire people who will be worse at the job and make sure they have all the military hardware they could want. And you think the second option was the "responsible use of public resources."
It is a gotcha because its a self fulfilling prophecy.
Also, especially in the US the cost of bad policing is incredibly high, yet another gotcha.
Putting on blinders doesn't remove reality
What are you talking about? People don't try to get into law enforcement on a job-hopping spree in between Starbucks and Walmart, it takes months to get into even the shitty training program, let alone actually on the force. The only "leaving soon" that happens is washing out, not because they finally got their dream accounting job.
I hear you only need 2 brain cells to rub together and make a spark. I also hear orange cats all share one. I know, random. But I learned that from an orange cat owner.
I mean, some countries, like my home country Finland, require a legitimate degree (equivalent level to engineers etc, with a "study point" value of 180 with each point being worth about 27 hours) as training.
Trust me, they know the laws surrounding pedestrians and cyclists and a whole lot more. 😂
Not to mention licensing.
Barbers getting tested about law?
Yeah, that’s the bar bit in the job title.
Hair dresser get 9-12 months training. A deputy sheriff get 26 weeks of training.
In the US, maybe they don't.
Germany requires approximately 4,000 hours of police training, over 2.5 to 3 years
I shouldn't have to know the law better than those who enforce and adjudicate it.
Then you get the ol "what are you a lawyer?"
This is like tax too
at least they're polite compared with US police
I know it’s a pretty low bar but at least he didn’t shoot the guy so that’s a win. That kind of exchange in many parts of the US would have landed the cyclist in the back of a cruiser or even in the morgue with six warning shots to the back.
Problem is, they are very confident about knowing the law, when actually they don't.
Had a similar discussion with an officer once, who was adamant I was required to carry my ID at all times (which is not true, except in some cases).
to be fair: knowing every rule is a task for lawyers. These kind of rules also change a lot.
I rather have that they focus on how enforce properly and can deescalate without force during training
If only cops had a quick and easy way to access information about the laws they enforce. I wonder what they could use 🤔
Gee, if only there were a device that could search laws based on keywords...
I know the cops all carry smartphones and have connected laptops in their cars, but apparently the phones only operate Candy Crush and Grindr while the laptops are always on Facebook whenever I have seen them...
Well they still expect you to know the law
Even lawyers don’t know every rule. There’s a reason they specialize.
not sure who downvoted you but this is true. My partner is a lawyer, was a public defender. She would actually come to me about stuff related to vehicle code because despite just being a car enthusiast and not a lawyer, have actually read more into it than she has.
And also why the best lawyers have lawyers below them helping with researching the law for their cases.
Your second point is very on the nose.
The officer should have considered the intent of the “law” he though he was enforcing. The intent of that law would be to keep pedestrians safe. Were any pedestrians at risk of being harmed by this cyclist? No. At that point he probably should have just let it slide. Especially if he is not confident he actually knows the law he’s trying to enforce.
But then his ego got in the way and he doubled down.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse... except if you're an officer of the law
So the rule is actually that cyclists need to dismount at a crossing.
That's what the cop insisted on and the cyclist disproved.
Given how the video looks, it's probably a few years old. Might have changed once or twice since then.
Besides, the cyclist did not insist that it is wrong, just that there is an exception for when no pedestrians are around.
They do need to know them, of course. People make mistakes.
German officer who was wrong: oh, oops, here speak with my boss
US officer who was wrong: GET DOWN ON THE GROUNDS WITH YOUR HANDS UP AND BEHIND YOUR BACK WHILE DOING JUMPING JACKS pew pew SHOTS FIRED, I REPEAT SHOTS FIRED, SUSPECT IS RESISTING ARREST! SUSPECT DOWN!
The least believable part of this is an officer giving clear directions before shooting
Yeah, lol. I just watched a video an hour ago where two or three officers yelled conflicting orders to someone at gun point. He was charged for resisting arrest...
I do not need to specify the country where this happened, right?
Did they shoot him repeatedly? Cuz that happens.
"The delinquent ran away from me in a menacing manner, turning his back on me in such a way that I feared for my life. That's why I felt compelled to empty my magazine into him, the elderly lady crossing the street next to him, and the teenager turning burgers inside the McDonald's behind him."
"You did the right thing, son, but first take some paid leave until things calm down. Worst case scenario, we'll have to let you go, but then you can always go back to working as a police officer in the next town."
STOP RESISTING!
But I'm not resisting, you just dislocated my shoulder and broke my ribs! It fucking hurts!
SCREAMING IN PAIN IS A SIGN OF RESISTING ARREST!
Germany has a really bad police brutality problem that‘s being brushed under the rug. Thankfully they aren‘t as trigger happy US cops when it comes to guns, but they like to to punch, kick and drag women, the elderly and even handicapped people during lawful protests. You can find countless videos on that on instagram or here.
At least cops not knowing shit about the laws they enforce is a global issue.
Sure, but this one didn’t cuff and arrest the cyclist for disagreeing.
Or shoot him.
Interestingly, the cyclist is allowed to cross the crossing lane while being on the bike. But since he isn't a pedestrian, he has no right of way and instead needs to wait for any cars to pass , while cars have to wait for pedestrians to cross. When the cyclist forces cars to wait because he crosses before they pass, its a Ordnungswidrigkeit
I drive in Hamburg, Germany. And almost every day, cyclists blast their way across a zebra stripe without slowing or signaling in any way. Let alone giving the cars the right of way.
Why are cops always so fucking stupid?
Power trips due to ego, I’m certain this is the only reason.
There’s only two types of people who become cops. Actual altruists, and pieces of shit with authority complexes. The altruists don’t last long. Pieces of shit are all that’s left running the show.
It’s just like politicians. You have to have the desire to control people inherently to even want the job.
A flaw in human nature.
Possibly ego, or also fear. They see it as their job to maintain authority and respect, so it feels like they can never admit being wrong.
In this case: you can't know perfectly all the rules and it made kind of sense that cyclists wouldn't go into crossings like that. Also, add that every single time a cop hands a ticket, they are gonna listen to all the excuses. They get trained by the common public to shut down any debate, otherwise they would be arguing more than policing, and they would be taken advantage of.
It also makes sense from an efficiency point, he has taken a decision, he can't stop every single time the decision is disputed. Instead, they send it to their superiors.
Could they be nicer about it? Yes. Absolutely. But again, they are facing the general public. Ask any public facing worker what they think about clients in general, and these guys don't have clients, have people that allegedly have broken the law in some way and are now confronted with the consequences.
Who wouldn't grow callous?
(Me, me I wouldn't. I'd be fired within a month, everyone would be taking advantage of me being nice and I wouldn't bring back those tasty tasty fines to my superiors)
You're just another sensible adult!!1
In Belgium the police officer would be completely right. Cyclists need to dismount and walk besides their bike when crossing such intersection. Car drivers do not need to give way to cyclist on such intersection.
Don't know for sure for Germany but i'll look it up.
The biker does not argue that he has priority over cars. He would have priority over cars if he dismounted and walked his bike. His argument is that there were no cars and he is not required to dismount (he only is if he wishes to have the same status as a pedestrian and take priority over any cars)
Correct and so was the biker
It’s a feature not a bug
If you join an institution, you become structurally motivated to think like that institution. Your pay depends on it, the pay of your superiors depends on it, the existence of the institution depends on it.
But maybe more importantly you are invested with a power, and that power only exists insofar as you use it. A power that you don't use is not a real power. So people invested with a power are motivated to use it because otherwise that power doesn't exist and their role is only theoretical. This is why even unpaid volunteers will let power go to their heads, because without its use it is not power.
Couldn't handle real college.
Certainty
Ask yourself, where do they come from, and you got your answer.
Why didn’t the police officer tell the cyclist to step back and lie on the ground with his hands on his head?
Oh, this is how policing is supposed to work. Mutual respect, not just barking orders and shooting if they are not immediately obeyed.
Is there any penalty to the cop for acting like they are definitely right when they are definitely wrong? Or a compensation to the person wronged?
Not sure how you improve when there is no feedback.
The guy needs to file a complaint to get his money back, hence why the number for the superior was given.
This is automatically tracked, and wil show up in the records. If enough people file complaints about a single issue it'll likely be discussed
10 euros is getting off light, He would have been shot 10 times here in the states.
I applaud the polite and courteous service provided by the law enforcement officer. Everything else can be cleared up with administrative escalation.
Hey, at least the cop takes the L at the end, when he could have decided to beat the guy up for "insubordination" or some other bullshit.
Edit: guys, I'm French and the french police very much could behave like that and has in the past, it's not specifically American
Edit 2: an American cop would probably just shoot the guy and call it "resisting arrest"
He didn’t do shit, he told him to contact his superiors. Didn’t admit a mistake didn’t dispute he was full of shit, just go ahead and throw his ignorance to someone else to deal with it
You only see very small parts of the interaction but from the vibe and tone I'm getting (I am German), he did realize the mistake but once he has given the ticket he cant take it back. Calling his superior will most likely resolve the situation.
German cops don't beat up people, that would actually get them fired and jailed, unlike American cops
[removed]
The things Americans are fed by their propaganda machine about other countries so they don't realize how messed up their own country is.
Let me remind you how propaganda made Germany go to war with the entire planet not too long ago.
Exactly. And that's what's happening with America right now, not Germany. Also, it's been 86 years since that war started.
Yeah, which is how and why we know now this is happening in the US
You don't have to. That is exactly what you did in the first place.
Lol what
Citations needed
Nobody was arrested you absolute walnut-for-brains.
Oh look, a troll account that keeps their comments hidden to hide their intentions of sowing dissent in Europe. Hi Russia! 👋
[deleted]
Well it's beat, you, while yelling "Stop resisting!"
Was just about to say this. The rest of the civilized world doesn’t have a police mafia
You would be quite confidently incorrect about the French police
Ok most of the developed world lol
fair enough
Oh...so its just not just American cops that are ignorant to the law...
You can find stupidity and incompetence anywhere.
US law enforcement just adds "trigger happy" to the mix, unfortunately. 🤷
Fucking keep your money I’m here to show I’m right
If this was in the US, the cyclist would have been violently detained, likely after being face planted by a scared tyrant, pummeled several times with fists and elbows because…. Well, officer safety of course… and if he resisted beyond verbally, tased, handcuffed, possibly shot, and berated for getting blood on the poor officers shit.
Man, imagine how many batons to the head, and additional charges, you'd get for arguing with a US cop like this.
In the US police would just tase you
Stop resisting!
Damn. All that arguing and then the cops hits him with "that will be a 10 euro fine" I was like "holy shit! This conversation probably cost more then the fine. (Not saying he should just pay if he's not in the wrong.)
Pretty sure in the US they would have been talking about arrests and bring them up on charges of disorderly conduct with a side of concussions and taser burns.
That's a guns out situation in the USA for sure
AFAIK the cyclist needs to get off the bike to be treated as a pedestrian (like the woman you see on the lower left corner at the very start of the video) to cross traffic otherwise they are under the same rules as a motor vehicle IE cant drive on a crosswalk
Correkt.
But they can still cross as a cyclist, they just don't have priority like a pedestrian does. The guy in the video actually does a perfekt job of explaining it. :)
But he didn't cross on the crossing marks he turned off them halfway crossing
So? That's also allowed.
The cop should have to pay the fine. They will learn real quickly then.
Now there's an idea. 👍
Did I hear 'Cheers' right at the end? 🍻
Sounds like he said "tschüss"
Cervüß is also used as a greeting/goodbye. Like in the US one can finish an email with "Cheers!"
Look I know police should bloody know the law they enforce.
But I’m just awestruck at a very civil conversation they just had. There was some frustration but not an angry shouting match. Refreshing to see.
Look I know police should bloody know the law they enforce.
But I’m just awestruck at a very civil conversation they had. There was some frustration but not an angry shouting match. Refreshing to see.
I love to see it
1000% sure...
V
It's so surprising to see someone approach a cop with a criticism and not immediately get shot. Oh wait, they were both vvhite 😩
Did everyone expect that cop to freak out and start beating the guy or am I just American?
Honestly thought this was a German comedy show.
"This is how wars get started."
"With people disagreeing?"
"No, with people speaking German."
Damn the bar in the US is so low that I don’t even really see why everyone is shitting on the cop. Grievances redressed, mistake corrected—all good.
At least that biker didn’t get chalked by goons with assault gear or tossed in a cage.
What if he got off the bike and walked it across the crosswalk?
Then he would be considered a pedestrian and have the right of way.
What if?
He was so close when he agreed pedestrians have the right of way... Meaning they take precedence over any other things that also want to use the same walkway.
I mean, by that logic would a car also be allowed to drive across the walkway?
I don’t know about UK traffic law, but here in Norway cyclists are counted as vehicles and have to follow the same rules that cars do, unless specifically allowed like separate bike lanes etc. they are only counted as pedestrians if they get off their bike. Following that logic a car would be allowed to do the same as a cyclist unless otherwise specified
If a law says "motor vehicles are not allowed on walkways" that does not mean 'motor vehicles must yield right of way to pedestrians before entering the walkway.' It means "motor vehicles are NOT allowed on walkways"
If a law says "motor vehicles must yield right of way to pedestrians on walkways" it means motor vehicles ARE allowed on the walkways, as long as it doesn't hinder a pedestrian's ability to do so.
I've yet to read the words "by that logic" on Reddit and have the following text in any way demonstrate the writer understands the logic presented. It almost always follows someone throwing my words in a blender, and trying to argue against what came out. In that regard, you did better than most. But it did still fall short.
Cars are allowed to drive on the crossing. They obviously are not allowed to drive up on the sidewalk though unlike cyclists.
In Norway, cyclist are allowed to ride on the sidewalks as long as they ride slow. They are certainly not treated exactly like cars, even when riding on a road with no bike lane. One such law is Vegtrafikkloven § 18.1, the rule that specifically allows bicycles to pass on the right of cars (not bicycles).
Yes, which confirms my statement that cyclists are considered as vehicles unless specified otherwise.
As for crossing walkways in Norway, cyclists do have to get off their bike in order for them to be considered as pedestrians and have the right of way. If a cyclist crosses the walkway without getting off the bike and forces cars to give way, they have broken the law. If they want to ride their bike across the walkway, they need to give way for other cars just like a regular intersection, because they are then treated as if they were driving a car.
Reread the original post that you replied to. The cop agrees that the pedestrian has the right of way but falls short of realizing that just because the pedestrian has the right of way they are not the only ones allowed to use the crosswalk. The poster only pointed this out.
This in no way implies that cars suddenly are allowed to drive up on sidewalk and cross the sidewalk.
Police don't give a damn what the law says. They're always right.
You clearly don’t live in the Netherlands, Germany or the Nordics.
Officer must have been trained in USA.
Nah man. That dude would have had his ass kicked in the us for arguing
Its crazy law enforcement doesnt need to understand the laws they enforce. If I dont follow SOPs I get fired.
I wish our cops could be wrong like that. When a German cop is wrong a citizen has to fight an unjust 10€ fine. When a US cop is wrong citizens often die.
Hmmm, so cops are dicks in other countries also. Good to know.
Less likely to shoot you tho' 👍
ACAB means all countries.
bulliedatschool
[deleted]
This is not even the most egregious "but I am technically right" contest between German people I have personally seen this year.
We need police at every red light and crossing to tackle cyclists not obeying the law
So the bike is not a pedestrian?
Mean he should fallow all traffic laws.
If youre a car youre a car.
If youre a pedestrian then youre a pedestrian.
Can't switch up when ever you feel like it
Why are the only 2 options car or pedestrian?
What would even be the 3rd?
A cyclist. If there's separate laws then its a separate category
A bicycle is neither a car nor a pedestrian. If a cyclist wants to cross the road at a zebras crossing, they don't enjoy the same privileges as a pedestrian - but of course they can still cross the road!
That's all this video is about. Not sure why you're arguing about cyclists not following traffic laws or switching things up, that reads like you're just making stuff up to get mad about.
Sort of lucky it wasn't US. Here there are two options. 1. Cop will ignore. 2. Cop will Taze.
So cyclists being insufferable is a global thing?
Not really insufferable when he's well within his rights?
How? He was fined 10€ even though he broke no rules
how is he being insufferable?
I lived and cycled in Germany in the early 90s. German cyclists are something else altogether - insufferable doesn’t quite do them justice. Who knows, maybe they’ve mellowed in the intervening 30+ years and are indeed now merely insufferable.
I actually stand with the police officer. Where I'm from it is, in fact, illegal to ride a bike across a pedestrian crossing and on sidewalks, unless they are specially designed for cyclists. I don't know how it is in Germany but I would suppose they have it very similar, and even if they don't, the officer handled it right by giving him the supervisor's number...
Just because it is illegal in your country doesn't mean it's illegal everywhere.
In my country, the law is actually not clear about whether cyclists are allowed to cross on a crosswalk while on their bike.
If they are walking besides their bike, they are allowed to cross and have right of way like a pedestrian. That part is easy.
If they're on their bike, though? That's unclear. Maybe they are allowed as long as they give way, or maybe they're not allowed at all. It's a never ending debate.
I tried to imply that I would presume similarity between my country and Germany ( neighboring countries ) but of course, you are right. I probably didn't write my thoughts clearly enough..