Now, I agree that one would think so and it should be so. But I’m seeing the opposite in what I’m finding. I really don’t know for certain one way or another, but it seems to me that there is no law against talking on a cell phone and riding your bike in California.
Way to go, Smapti! Good for you for admitting a mistake.
I’m very capable of it – I apologize if I made a mistake here and you just jumped the gun and made an assertion without checking. Sounds like you made an error here – hopefully you can learn from your mistake and better check your assertions in the future before you make them.
I’m no lawyer, but this seems to be the pertinent text with respect to California use of wireless devices with respect to the road:
Nothing about bicycling and wireless communications.
I found a proposed change from 2010, but it apparently died in the state Assembly.
But I gotta admit, I thought it was against the law to talk/text too.
Which has me wondering: what part of the CVC was the cop using to cite the bicyclist?
Contempt of cop. With driving while black as a compounding offense.
Pedaling while black.
So, the guy who exceeds the speed limit because his wife is about to give birth is morally equivalent to a rapist-murderer?
When MLK defied police orders and led a group across the Edmund Pettus Bridge because they wanted to register to vote, his action was the moral equivalent of child pornography?
This raises a variety of questions that we’d like to ask you, Smapti. Let’s just start with one:
Smapti, can you name any other Doper who agrees with your position here? Any other human on the planet?
Results not found, try a broader search.
That’s the spirit. I hear Scott Kelly is quite the authoritarian.
The astronaut?
Whoosh?
Obviously, but I still don’t get it… 
EDIT: Ahh, I get it… he’s not “on the planet”!!!
That was indeed my lame joke.
I also think it’s (mildly) funny to imagine that the wildly accomplished and all-around excellent Scott Kelly is secretly a fascist.
In space no one can hear you scheme.
What special right does he have that places him above the law that the rapist-murderer lacks?
What special right did they have that placed them above the law that child pornographers lack?
Not off the top of my head. Is that relevant somehow?
I can’t remember where I read this… “…whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…,”
It’s relevant in showing how deluded and disturbed you are.
And in this country, and most other countries in the world, we have a system by which the people can do that, peacefully and democratically.
No violent revolution needed.
We just need violent cops?
Nearly all of the progress that this country has made involved some level of civil disobedience, and wouldn’t have happened without this disobedience and resistance against unjust law and authority.
As has been demonstrated to you over and over again, your bullshit philosophy has zero recourse when faced with the incredibly common occurrence of injustice supported by law and authority – as most injustice has been in human history. A race of Smaptis would make perfect slaves. Having Smaptis for neighbors in '30s Germany would have been certain doom for Jews. A society full of Smaptis means that no one reports about a bomb on a plane and no one stops to help an injured child on the street. If black Americans had been Smaptis in the 1950s and 60s, segregation and Jim Crow would have never ended.
If you act in real life as you post, you’re a truly terrible human being.
The problem with laws is that they have to be interpreted. Lawyers are sometimes adept at presenting an interpretation of the text that is or seems to be apposite to a law’s intent, but somehow we are constrained to apply the literal interpretation.
For instance, I might like to buy a $3000 HPVelotechnik Scorpion fx tricycle, which would be capable of speeds in excess of 30mph at times, but my county’s legal code says that I would not be allowed to ride it on the street because none of its wheels are larger than 20". That is a badly written law, but the police could, at least in theory, use it against me.
I will go out on a limb to say that no individual is in full compliance will the law all the time. You could probably be cited for some sort of a violation some time today. That gives the police pretty broad authority to pick a person at random (or because they look odd) and collar them for some sort of offense. This thread seems to be full of such instances.