Topic

commute

35 petitions

Started 3 weeks ago

Petition to Governer Roy Cooper

Legalize Lane Splitting/Filtering in NC

Lane-splitting or filtering is the act of riding a motorcycle on the lane separation lines on a highway. This is regarded by many countries to be the smartest method of motorcycle riding in traffic. It serves as a perk to commuting on a motorcycle and reducing the impact on emissions over driving a much larger vehicle. It also does much more than that. Lane-splitting reduces traffic, reduces injuries, and actually INCREASES rider safety. This is all supported in many studies, with one study from UC Berkley being the most recent and detailed (some details below). Among the U.C. Berkeley findings: – Lane-splitting is safe if done in traffic moving at 50 mph or less, and if motorcyclists do not exceed the speed of other vehicles by more than 15 mph– 69 percent of lane-splitting motorcyclists were exceeding the traffic speed by 15 mph or less speed differentials up to 15 mph were not associated with changes in the frequency of injury– Compared to riders who were not splitting lanes, lane-splitting motorcyclists were markedly less likely to suffer head injury (9 percent vs. 17 percent), torso injury (19 percent vs. 29 percent) or fatal injury (1.2 percent vs. 3 percent)– Lane-splitting riders were significantly less likely to be rear-ended than non-lane-splitting riders (2.6 percent vs. 4.6 percent)– Lane-splitting motorcyclists were more likely to be wearing a full-face helmet than other motorcyclists (81 percent vs. 67 percent)– Compared to other motorcyclists, lane-splitting riders were more often riding on weekdays and during commuting hours, were using better helmets and were traveling at slower speeds;– Lane-splitting riders were less likely to have been using alcohol. http://www.cycleworld.com/2015/06/02/ama-study-finds-lane-splitting-increases-rider-saftey/  In North Carolina, lane-splitting is not specifically illegal or legal. This causes inconsistent outcomes in court regarding injuries, crashes, or other litigation pertaining to lane-splitting. With lane-splitting being legalized and written into law, it would allow for more clear grounds for the court system to base decisions on. This petition is to get lane-splitting legalized and written into law with the following provisions: - Definition: Lane-splitting is the act of operating a motorcycle in between lanes on a highway or interstate in order to pass traffic. - Definition: Filter/Filtering is the act of operating a motorcycle to the front of halted traffic in regards to traffic control lights (red-light). - Allow lane-splitting/filtering for all motorcycles (provisions would be made specifically restricting vehicles classified as motorcycles with more than 2 wheels, i.e. Polaris Slingshot) - Lane-splitting is encouraged to be performed between the two left-most lanes but is not limited only to those areas. - Motorcyclists may lane-split providing that the motorcyclist does not exceed a maximum speed of 45 miles per hour and no more than 15 miles-per-hour more than the surrounding traffic. (if surrounding traffic is moving at 10mph, the motorcyclist may not travel faster than 25mph) - Without a witness or proof via a video recording device, accidents will be favored to the vehicle that is not lane-splitting. - Motorcyclist must be properly wearing a DOT approved helmet. - Motor vehicles not lane-splitting shall not impede motion of vehicles that are lane-splitting - Motorcyclists choosing to filter must proceed to the front of traffic and choose either lane to the right or left. It is not permitted to sit at the light in between other vehicles. When moving into either lane, it is acceptable for the motorcyclists to be in the pedestrian walkway as not to completely block the walkway in an unsafe manner. - It is the motorcyclists responsibility to determine if lane-splitting and/or filtering can be performed in a safe manner. Petition information originally from the following link:https://www.change.org/p/make-lane-splitting-filtering-legal-in-north-carolina This petition will be given to Roy Cooper. He is North Carolina's Governor.  

Jacob Dockery
110 supporters
Update posted 7 months ago

Petition to President of the United States, Office of the Pardon Attorney, Donald Trump

Free Warren Charlton (Petition for Commutation from the President)

Warren Charlton is serving a 30 year sentence for a low-level nonviolent drug offence.  Warren Charlton was indicted in the Northern District of Florida (Case No. 3:12cr 10/LAC) and charged with conspiring to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine.Warren was not caught with any drugs in his possession. The case against him consisted of the testimony of cooperating codefendants who testified against him in hopes of receiving time reductions off their own sentences. This type of 'cooperation' is common in federal drug cases where many defendants facing mandatory minimum sentences will do whatever is necessary to reduce their exposure and will gladly snitch on other individuals. But as recently noted by Mr. Page Pate (a criminal defense attorney and founding member of the Georgia Innocence Project) "Unfortunately this cooperation usually bears little resemblance to the truth."There was no violence, no guns, no gangs, or ties to large scale drug cartels in Warren's case, yet he was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison.One of the factors that played a role in this extraordinarily lengthy prison sentence was the '851 enhancement' that was applied to his case. This enhancement generally doubles the mandatory minimum sentence for a person who has a prior felony drug conviction. Some federal prosecutors use the threat of a 851 enhancement to coerce guilty pleas and cooperation from low-level drug offenders. Warren was hit with the 851 enhancement for exercising his right to a trial.In August 2013 (one year after Warren's sentencing) then Attorney General Eric Holder declared a major change in Justice Department policy, instructing federal prosecutors to avoid mandatory minimum sentences and prior felony enhancements (851 enhancements) in low-level, non-violent drug cases. Mr. Holder declared that "Mandatory minimums and so-called '851 notices' have created unduly harsh sentences and rising prison costs." He also directed prosecutors 'not to seek or threaten to seek 851 enhancements for drug defendants simply to coerce them into a plea agreement', as was done in the case of Warren Charlton. Without the 851 enhancement Warren's sentence would have been significantly lower.President Obama when speaking at the NAACP convention in Philadelphia in July 2015, stated "We've also locked up more and more nonviolent drug offenders than ever before, for longer than ever before, and that is the real reason our prison population is so high." He then went on to say "In far too many cases, the punishment simply does not fit the crime. If you're a low-level drug dealer, or you violate your parole, you owe some debt to society, you have to be held accountable and make amends. But you don't owe 20 years. You don't owe a life sentence. That's disproportionate to the price that should be paid.  "We agree with President Obama, Warren Charlton has to be held accountable and make amends . . . but he does not owe 30 years.

Angelica Charlton
367 supporters
Started 1 year ago

Petition to Don't Break Drake

DON’T BREAK SF DRAKE! FOCUS ON ENHANCING TRAFFIC FLOW

Since spring 2015, Marin County, under the direction of District 2 Supervisor Katie Rice, has been developing a plan to “rehabilitate” the county’s most vital east-west artery, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard from the Ross Town line to highway 101.  Having been allocated by the Transportation Authority of Marin substantially more money than needed for simple paving, the county formed a Community Advisory Committee and held 3 workshops to help decide what to do with the “extra” money.  No one outside of the immediate neighborhood (except Marin County Bicycle Coalition) was included in the CAC nor was any significant effort made to ensure the notification and participation of the broader community.  As a result, the much-touted “community” input into the project design did not prioritize the needs of the tens of thousands of drivers throughout Central Marin who daily use SFD or alternate routes that will also become seriously congested as drivers seek to escape the SFD gridlock.  Affected constituents who were not alerted or included in the process include those who currently travel regularly via SFD towards the 101 from Fairfax, San Anselmo, Ross, Kentfield and Greenbrae.  The county should also have notified and included in public meetings those who regularly use or live along the alternate routes: 2nd and 4th streets in San Rafael, Magnolia in Larkspur, and Tamalpais in Corte Madera. Now that the design process and (limited) public outreach is largely complete, drivers are belatedly learning of the existence of the SFD Rehabilitation project.   An extended construction period (best guess: 2 years) will back up SFD and divert traffic onto alternate routes. Moreover, the project design contains several elements that will PERMANENTLY slow traffic and/or increase commute times:  e.g., narrower lanes, squared off turning corners, elimination of “slip” lanes for expedited right turns, and an additional signalized crosswalk.   All this comes at a big cost (which has steadily risen to the latest $19 million) with negative benefit. Sir Francis Drake Boulevard is an essential element of our shared community infrastructure.  It should not be reconstructed without the participation and approval of the entire affected constituency.   Accordingly: We, the undersigned, request that the County of Marin reject the current version of the Sir Francis Drake Rehabilitation Plan (“the Plan”) as contrary to the needs of most constituents and to Measure A (sales tax approved for congestion relief). We further request that prior to proceeding with any future Sir Francis Drake Rehabilitation plan the county of Marin: Provide advance official notice from the county regarding the Project to all jurisdictions and residents of the towns and cities impacted by the Plan, including, but not limited to Kentfield, Larkspur, Ross, San Anselmo, Fairfax, San Rafael, and Corte Madera. Officially solicit, compile and tally comments from residents in all the above locales regarding any proposed Sir Francis Drake Boulevard project.  This should be done via well noticed public meetings at which formal presentations and Q&A occur in an assembly format; and by providing email and other addresses to which public comments can be submitted and tallied. Ensure the Plan is in full compliance with both the intent and the letter of the law for Measure A, a sales tax that was approved by voters to fund traffic congestion relief projects.  Funds should not be spent on elements that impede traffic flow or on beautification. Make certain the focus of any SFD Rehabilitation project is on achieving the maximum vehicular flow improvement with the minimum construction-related disruption — unless the above requested public input provides clear direction to the contrary.    

Don't Break Drake
379 supporters