Posts Tagged ‘right’

Possibly Legal But Stupid Nevertheless: Riding Bikes Side-By-Side Slowly Uphill on Pine Street

Thursday, July 31st, 2014

Now some cops in California will give you a ticket for this, for riding side by side at 5 MPH on a street like Pine.

Legal or not, I don’t recommend this kind of thing: 

Click to expand

(And actually, the CA code section that was written to limit the right of cyclists to block other traffic is now interpreted by some to give special rights to cyclists. It depends on how you look at things.)

Google Seeks the “Right Balance” on the Right To Be Forgotten: “Expert Advisory Council” to Hold Meetings in Europe Soon

Friday, July 11th, 2014

The latest from the Google Blog on the so-called Right To Be Forgotten in the First Amendment-free EU:

Searching for the right balance

[So in five words I'm counting two puns and one subtle jab at the possibility of an absence of balance in this latest unappealable edict handed down from the Court of Justice.]

So here’s the wind-up:

“In May, the Court of Justice of the European Union established a “right to be forgotten.” Today, we published an op-ed by David Drummond, senior vice president of corporate development and chief legal officer, in the U.K.’s The Guardian, Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, France’s Le Figaro and Spain’s El Pais, discussing the ruling and our response. We’re republishing the op-ed in full below. -Ed.”

And here’s the pitch – the final two grafs:

“That’s why we’ve also set up an advisory council of experts, the final membership of which we’re announcing today. These external experts from the worlds of academia, the media, data protection, civil society and the tech sector are serving as independent advisors to Google. The council will be asking for evidence and recommendations from different groups, and will hold public meetings this autumn across Europe to examine these issues more deeply. Its public report will include recommendations for particularly difficult removal requests (like criminal convictions); thoughts on the implications of the court’s decision for European Internet users, news publishers, search engines and others; and procedural steps that could improve accountability and transparency for websites and citizens.”

“The issues here at stake are important and difficult, but we’re committed to complying with the court’s decision. Indeed it’s hard not to empathize with some of the requests we’ve seen—from the man who asked that we not show a news article saying he had been questioned in connection with a crime (he’s able to demonstrate that he was never charged) to the mother who requested that we remove news articles for her daughter’s name as she had been the victim of abuse. It’s a complex issue, with no easy answers. So a robust debate is both welcome and necessary, as, on this issue at least, no search engine has an instant or perfect answer.”

“Posted by David Drummond, Senior Vice President, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer

Well played, G!

Driver and Writer CW Nevius Goes on a “Rant” Against the “Militant” Pedestrians of SF – Do They Have the Right to Jaywalk?

Friday, January 31st, 2014

Here’s the latest effort from CW Nevius, who’s taking a break from being spokesman for San Francisco’s right-side-of-the-aisle  political faction to go on a “bit of a rant” against local pedestrians. But what’s up with this?  

“Even when they are in the right, I worry about them. When the traffic light countdown gets to five or six, they step confidently into the crosswalk — which is their right…”

But pedestrians don’t have “the right” to do so. It’s agin CA law – check out V C Section 21456,* which is dealt with by Rule #3 of the Five Rules for Pedestrians.

Don’t you have an editor, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have an editor, and plus, editors cost money, that’s right.

But don’t you have a fact checker, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have a fact checker, and plus, fact checkers cost money, that’s right.

But don’t you have a photographer, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, photographers cost money. So all your observations, we’ll just have to take your word about them. OK fine. BTW, [sarcasmmode ON] nice stock photo you’ve got there, Neve. “Cause a stock photo taken in the People’s Republic of China, you know, from more than a thousand li away, well, that really illustrates how “militant” and “freaking nuts” San Francisco peds are, huh? [sarcasmmode OFF]

And oh, BTW Neve, the peds of SF aren’t militant, not at all. Try to find a different word for what you mean.

Of course you’re new in town, I get that. Sure, welcome to San Francisco, Neve.

But you’re doing a half-assed job doing your half-time gig.

You need to try harder.

*”Walk, Wait, or Don t Walk

21456. Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words “WALK” or “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:

(a) “WALK” or approved “Walking Person” symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.

(b) Flashing or steady “DON’T WALK” or “WAIT” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol is showing.

Amended Ch. 413, Stats. 1981. Effective January 1, 1982.”

Guess Where I Ride on Fulton Outbound: To the Left of the Bike Lane, In It, or To the RIght?

Thursday, January 9th, 2014

Here we go, in the Western Addition, outbound, gently uphill.

Note the black lines indicating where the bike lane lines should be, and where they used to be:

Click to expand

The answer, Gentle Reader, is to the right of the bike lane lines. Which I suppose is in the supposed “door zone.” But I ain’t ever been doored, at least in the conventional* sense, despite the fact that I have much more time on bike in San Francisco than you, yes you, Gentle Reader. I have more time, more miles, more years, more decades on the Streets of San Francisco than you is what I’m saying, sorry.

And I’m leaving plenty of space for others to pass me. So pass me, I don’t care.

New topic: Note the next block, where the SFMTA has decided to allow 90 degree parking to placate the denizens of District 5. I don’t approve of this, for various reasons.

JMO

*Now, I’ve crashed into car doors, sure. Like the time I hit an aging Accord driven by a 16-year-old who thought he could make a turn from McAllister onto Gough at the same time another car was making the same turn. (My left elbow still clicks to this day and it will for the rest of my life oh well.) And I kind of bounced off of a door on McAllister in the PJ’s due to a lady turning into a housing project parking lot from a little bit too far away, IMO, but that was a no harm no foul kind of thing and let’s say that mistakes were made on both sides of that transaction. And I got doored by bouncing off a partially-opened door going uphill on 6th Ave at a very low speed and I’ve gotten doored by passengers getting out of cars on the right side on Market. But I aint ever been doored in the conventional sense.

Double-Parking: It’s Your Right as a San Franciscan, Particularly When You’re Riding in a Convoy

Thursday, July 18th, 2013

On most streets, nobody’s going to stop you, so why not do it?

The only downside would be causing an accident, ’cause you could have some liability there.

But see? These gals are Doin’ It Right – they parked in the middle of the block. Whatever you do, don’t park too close to a cross-street:

Click to expand

Ah, breaker one-nine, this here’s the Rubber Duck. You gotta copy on me, Big Ben, c’mon?

Ah, yeah, 10-4, Big Ben, for sure, for sure. By golly, it’s clean clear to Flag Town, c’mon.

Yeah, that’s a big 10-4 there, Big Ben, yeah, we definitely got the front door, good buddy.

Mercy sakes alive, looks like we got us a convoy…

Why is This Lady CHP Officer Standing on the Central Freeway? The Better to Stop and/or Tase You

Tuesday, March 12th, 2013

I have no idea how anyone could think that it was a good idea to end America’s primary east-west interstate freeway at Market and Octavia, but that’s what we have with the two-lane Central Freeway off-ramp these days.

Anyway right at the end of the off-ramp, the shoulder turns into a right-turn-only lane. And that’s right where this California Highway Patrol officer was standing the other day, with her prowler blocking your path.

Thusly.

“The current standard issue firearm for CHP officers is the Smith & Wesson Model 4006 TSW in .40 S&W. Each CHP patrol car is equipped with a Remington 870 Police 12‑gauge shotgun and a Colt AR‑15A2 in .223. Additionally, some officers are authorized to carry a taser.” If she has a Taser, she would be carrying it like this.

Click to expand

So I guess she was looking for CVC 21755 Pass on Right Safely violators?

Due to the perpetually congested traffic conditions there’s no place for you to hide after seeing the black and white Crown Vic.

It’s a living.

Anyway, I’ve never seen this kind of law enforcement technique of standing about on a freeway and waiting for the perps…

If You Think Not Making a Right Turn at 6th and Market Street is Somewhat Verboten, Just Try Making a Left

Friday, March 8th, 2013

As this driver just did, loaded up with household goods for a trip back up north to Oregon or Washington or whichever state is named on the license plate.

Thusly:

Click to expand

What drivers do is get stuck on Market outbound and then they see the No Left signs one after the other, 2nd, New Monty, 3rd, 4th, 5th and then they get frustrated and make a left on 6th Street, as here.

And when you make that kind of move, the cops can see you from all around.

(What we should have are signs saying No Left Turns Next 2 Miles, or something, like what we have on 19th Avenue, an official State Highway.)

Of course, if the driver were on Market heading inbound at this very same intersection, then a right turn would be mandatory and going straight just might get her a ticket as well. The thing about that, tho, is that the chances of getting a ticket for not turning right is way less than 1% but, well, making a left you are just begging for a ticket.

(Which you can just throw away once you get back to home state, if you want, IDK.)

Boy, This Minivan Driver Sure Didn’t Want to Make the Mandatory Right Turn at 10th and Market – Look What He Did

Wednesday, February 13th, 2013

From the right-only lane on Market inbound at 10th Street, over the bike lane, and into the transit-only lane.

See? 

Click to expand

From here, the minivan driver went straight down Market, forward, ever forward…

Does CA Really Need a “Social Media Privacy Act?” No Matter, SB 1349, the Job Interview Facebook Password Law, is Here

Friday, May 25th, 2012

Uhhhhhhhhhhh, I’m not going to articulate myself on this one.

But you, you go right ahead, feel free to tell your buds what you think. (But first, please email me your FB account names / passwords, and your intimate photos and whatnot.)

All right, off you go:

“California Senate Approves Social Media Privacy Act - Yee’s SB 1349 will prohibit employers, colleges from seeking Facebook, Twitter passwords

SACRAMENTO – On a bipartisan 28-5 vote, the California Senate today approved legislation authored by Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) to stop employers from formally requesting or demanding employees or job applicants provide their social media usernames and passwords.

Yee’s bill also prohibits public and private colleges and universities from requiring such information of students.

The bill comes after a growing number of businesses, public agencies, and colleges around the country are asking job seekers, workers, and students for their Facebook and Twitter account information.

“I am pleased by today’s overwhelming vote to end this unacceptable invasion of personal privacy,” said Yee. “The practice of employers or colleges demanding social media passwords is entirely unnecessary and completely unrelated to someone’s performance or abilities.”

In addition to the privacy of students and workers, accessing social media accounts may also invade the privacy of family members and friends who thought they only were sharing information with their own social media network.

“These social media outlets are often for the purpose of individuals to share private information – including age, marital status, religion, sexual orientation and personal photos – with their closest friends and family,” said Yee. “This information is illegal for employers and colleges to use in making employment and admission decisions and has absolutely no bearing on a person’s ability to do their job or be successful in the classroom.”

“SB 1349 is a significant step towards securing Californians’ constitutional right to privacy, both online and offline, in the workplace and in school,” said Jon Fox, Consumer Advocate for CALPIRG.

“If employers are permitted to access the private information of job applicants, unscrupulous hiring managers will be given greater leeway to circumvent anti-discrimination laws,” said Joe Ridout of Consumer Action.

Rather than formally requesting passwords and usernames, some employers have demanded applicants and employees to sit down with managers to review their social media content or fully print out their social media pages. SB 1349 will also prohibit this practice.

Shannon Minter, Legal Director for National Center for Lesbian Rights, said that the practice of requesting social media passwords is the equivalent to reading a personal diary, and also LGBT employees, job applicants, and students already face significant obstacles when applying for schools and jobs.

Minter said that SB 1349 helps ensures individuals are “judged by their qualifications and performance, rather than elements of their private life.”

IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law professor Lori Andrews, who specializes in Internet privacy, told the Associated Press that these practices even when given voluntarily should not be allowed.

“Volunteering is coercion if you need a job,” Andrews told the AP.

Johnny Veloz, an unemployed photographer, told KCRA Sacramento that he was asked for his Facebook password during a recent job interview. Veloz was denied the job after refusing to provide the information.

“For me, that’s rude and it’s not respectful,” Veloz told KCRA. “Someone has privacy and you expect them to respect that.”

Yee’s bill would also prohibit employers and colleges from demanding personal email addresses and login information of employees, applicants, and students.

SB 1349 will now be considered by the State Assembly before heading to the Governor.”

And oh, if I ever crafted a “social media privacy act,” I can just about guarantee you that Facebook WOULD NOT LIKE IT. Not one bit.

Just saying.

Corvette Bummer: The SFPD is _Really_ Stepping Up Enforcement of the “Mandatory Turn at Sixth and Market” Rule

Tuesday, November 1st, 2011

Sometimes, you’ll see three cars pulled over at the same time. It’s safe to say, “The Grace Period is Now Over.”

Now, what kind of person ignores the giant signs on inbound Market telling them to Turn Right Only?

The kind of person who has a greater tendency to lack a driver license or insurance or registration or registration hardcopy or registration decal. Oh well.

So, that’s life on the Streets of San Francisco these days.

This tike was not happy, that’s for sure:

Click to expand

What people tend to say to the SFPD is something like:

Well, how am I supposed to get to the Nordstrom?

The answer, involving the mention of Mission Street or Folsom, well that strikes our visitors as craaaaaazy.

So they conclude, if they hadn’t already, that it’s a hassle to drive about SoMA and Union Square and the FiDi.

Which it is.

And some of them vow to never come back.

Oh well.