I've lived in Bloomington most of my life (except for a few years in south minneapolis) and never ran into any problems riding bikes there although I
always made sure I was well lit up with taillights/headlights towards dusk.

Bums me out, I'll be careful when I'm riding near there from now on just in case.

Nope, just oral. I did a request for public data as a subject of the data, though, and I should be able to see whatever was recorded about the stop in a couple of days.

Let us (me) know what you find out. At some point it becomes an unlawful stop or harassment or something.

My experience is that cops see bikes doing something wrong and pull them over. Then they go to their book of statutes and try to figure out what to charge you with. They gotta come up with something. That something is what you can take to court. That something is also the thing that you should have been warned about.

At any point did you ask if you were free to go or if you were being detained?

No, I did not, though clearly I was not detained. In fact, I did just about everything wrong: according to Bicycling and the Law, I shouldn't have attempted to argue with the officer at all, and I should have recorded the incident.

I am requesting further data from Bloomington to get a picture of their bicycle enforcement. But as a subject of the data, they already gave me the "CAD notes" from the traffic stop. I've posted them here.

The officer, Michael A. Smith noted:

MISADVISED ON STATE LAW FOR BIKES.



blerg.

Maybe this sounds elitist, but I am always surprised when people cannot spell basic words correctly.

Technically you were detained.

SDHO was pointing that out because it is a question you are supposed to ask to remind an officer that they cannot keep you for too long, lest it be unlawful. This is also a reason why if you are trafficking drugs you have the right to a speedy roadside stop. If the officer detains you for an unreasonable amount of time while waiting for a drug dog he can run the risk of a judge throwing the evidence out and a lawsuit.

And it's the legal way of asking "you gonna get this over with and ticket me or can I go?"

SDHO,
This is funny because I had the exact opposite thing happen to me. A police officer yelled at me this past summer for riding in the right turn lane when I was intending to go straight.

I was at the state fairgrounds on a night when traffic was very busy there. I was headed east on Como and I hadn't reached Snelling yet. The left lane was moving faster than the right one at the time (too fast to feel safe in, especially given how narrow it was) so I waited in the right one until I got to the stop sign at the Snelling southbound ramp.

When I got to the front, the police officer who was motioning the traffic through yelled at me and told me to not go any further. She said that the only place I could go was to the right up the ramp but that I would feel uncomfortable if I took a right turn and wound up on the highway. She then told me to get off the road, so I moved up onto the sidewalk. After that I was allow to proceed through once she gave the pedestrians permission to walk across the Como ramp.

I did turn around and explain to her that I was trying to stay on the right side of the road. She told me that the right lane was a right turn lane only and that I should have been in the left lane, even if that would have meant impeding the cars that were trying to go straight.

My mind is boggled by the cop being unable to spell "road".

so im just going to respond to the title of this and not read anything else. aren't we allowed to take a whole lane?

Almost always.

For our safety we must usually control the lane we are driving in. This idea is supported by the law which says that we may control the lane except when all these conditions apply:

* We're not passing another vehicle, and
* we're not preparing for a left turn, and
* there are no obstructions or hazards we need to avoid, and
* the lane is wide very, and
* other traffic is moving faster than we are moving.

gotcha.

I will say, I do feel more comfortable taking obviously narrow lanes (10' wide or something), but even at 13', it's hard to argue that you are able to maintain a safe distance from the curb (or parked cars), and that there is adequate width for you and your bike, the passing vehicle, AND the lawfully required clearance between you. There are some streets, like Chicago Ave between Lake St and 46th, where there truly is enough space for you to maintain a safe distance from parked cars and share the lane with moving ones.

However, this issue in Bloomington was not about position within the particular lane -- at least not explicitly. While I'm sure the cop would have preferred I was riding in the gutter (or, better yet, on the sidewalk), his explicit objection was that I was riding in the right-hand through lane, rather than in an auxiliary lane that had a channelized right turn at the next light.

This presence of auxiliary lanes is pretty unique to Bloomington, but exists in dozens -- if not hundreds -- of locations around the city. Fortunately, I've never really seen this elsewhere. There is one like this in Richfield. None that I know of in Minneapolis.

To be very clear, let me give you a number of examples of this -- and this was just poking around American Blvd, east of 35W:

Lyndale from 82nd to American Blvd
Lyndale from EB Highway 5/494 to American Blvd
American Blvd from Nicollet to Girard Ave
American Blvd from IKEA to Thunderbird Rd
S 24th Ave from American Blvd to Lindau Ln (two lanes!)
E Old Shakopee Rd from S 28th Ave to S 24th Ave
S 28th Ave from E 82nd St to E Old Shakopee Rd
S 34th Ave from EB Highway 5/494 to American Blvd

In all these instances, when riding along the road and encountering one of these aux lanes, you are left with the awkward choice of merging twice (first right, then left again) in a short amount of time, or riding a full lane from the curb.

Damned if you're do, damned if you don't, I guess. What's really annoying about that is that the engineers clearly intend bicycles to go straight form the right-turn-only lane -- because there's a bike lane that forms just across the intersection from it under the Snelling overpass.

I am not above ever riding in right-turn-only lanes. On roads like Pilot Knob or Cedar in the south metro, I will gladly ride on a paved shoulder when provided, and proceed straight through a right-turn-only lane if necessary. However, I know that it's more correct not do that -- to ride in the right-most through lane. But I think basically everyone would prefer to look the other way and have me use the shoulder and turn lane (I always occupy the center or left of the turn lane to prevent a right hook). What really irritates me about the Bloomington matter is the need to make two merging movements, in and out of the auxiliary/right turn lane.