This story is about a bicyclist from New York who receives a ticket for not riding his bike in the bike lanes. He tried to explain to the officer that riding in the bike lane was not always the safest option, but the officer was adamant and insisted that he only ride in the designated lane. From then on the cyclist only rode in the bike lane, despite the trash cans, pedestrians, or vehicles.

In class we talked about why we don’t follow laws. Someone said it was about convenience, someone else said that we don’t follow laws because we know we can get away with it, most of the time. What if the law, like in this case, was hazardous? I think that’s what makes this a newsworthy story. I’m not saying we don’t need to follow the law and uphold our portion of the social contract, but shouldn’t the law have our best interest in mind? The biker didn’t make his choice based on convenience, he made his decision based on what was the safest choice. Isn’t that what’s important? If this story would have been published maybe he would have known how to react to the officer and what he should have said to state his case.

Video