http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/ Cycling, traffic safety and legal topics; energy, transit and transportion economics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:34:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/comment-page-1/#comment-9525 Bicycles are not motor vehicles, and why it matters @ Arizona Bike Law Blog Sun, 28 Aug 2011 17:41:43 +0000 http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/#comment-9525 [...] is not a vehicle, why does a cyclist have to stop? Simple, because of a law helpfully titled Applicability of traffic laws to bicycle riders,  §28-812, where it says “A person riding a bicycle [...] [...] is not a vehicle, why does a cyclist have to stop? Simple, because of a law helpfully titled Applicability of traffic laws to bicycle riders,  §28-812, where it says “A person riding a bicycle [...]

]]> http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/comment-page-1/#comment-718 Arizona Bike Law Blog » Blog Archive » Do "points" apply to bicyclists? Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:17:33 +0000 http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/#comment-718 [...] then this analysis seems to ignore the applicability statute, which specifically makes bicyclists “subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver [...] [...] then this analysis seems to ignore the applicability statute, which specifically makes bicyclists “subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver [...]

]]> http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/comment-page-1/#comment-347 Arizona Bike Law Blog » Blog Archive » Is a Bikelane part of the Roadway? Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:44:17 +0000 http://azbikelaw.org/blog/applicability-statutes-why-are-there-two/#comment-347 [...] twist here being that the applicability statute was §28-811 , and not §28-812 (also see Applicability Statutes - why are there two?). Confusingly, both say when and which statutes apply to bicyclists; 811 says that “this [...] [...] twist here being that the applicability statute was §28-811 , and not §28-812 (also see Applicability Statutes – why are there two?). Confusingly, both say when and which statutes apply to bicyclists; 811 says that “this [...]

]]>