Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Question, how does the law dictate red lights and stop signs where you live?
In NYC, cyclists are treated as automobiles and must stop and wait for green. If you are caught you face the same fines as drivers and points on your license.
I feel this is ridiculous. Here in NYC, there are lights and stop signs everywhere. I honestly feel a yield, cross when clear is adequate for these situations.
I say these because unlike a car you loose momentum from stopping, and one of the best purposes to use a bike here is quick transportation.
I'll be honest, I run them all time. In fact nearly everyone does unless it is not safe to cross.
I am an avid cyclist, and totally OK with cops pulling over cyclists for running stop signs and red lights.
I also wish they would ticket idiots for riding on the wrong side of the road...
Well laws vary according to location. For instance I know for a fact there is at least one state in the USA where cyclists can treat red lights as stop signs.
In certain areas in Europe, red lights are treated as yield signs and I feel that would be more suitable in an urban environment like NYC.
As for momentum. What I should have said was momentum helps a cyclists keep speed, while a car has an engine to do the work from a complete stop.
I agree that riding on the wrong side of the road is not a good idea and should be discouraged. My beef are red lights, I don't know how it is in your parts of California but in NYC there are lights every block in many cases. In many areas the traffic crawls along in gridlock at intersections too where it is completely safe to glide by as long as you are alert. Stopping at every light would defeat a lot of the time saving benefits of cycling here.
I suggest a rule change in dense urban areas like NYC, Chicago, DC, ect. Yield at red lights and stop signs (not full speed, take caution).
In my state, cyclists are supposed to follow the same laws as cars - they just choose not to. The number of times I've watched a bike zoom through a 4 way stop, a busy intersection with a red light, or just a stop sign is unbelievable. And those that pull those stunts never seem to have a helmet or adequate reflectors. I live in an area where people cycle for transportation and I love that. However, the few bad apples who are causing me to wear out my breaks and have even come close to "tboning" my car do such a disservice to the good cyclists who follow the law.
Yes, we have multiple stop lights as well. NY is not unique in that regard. I just stop for each light as they come.
Ever golf? Each hazard is a opportunity.
I challenge the OP to cite the relevant laws in this supposed "one state" which make special exceptions for bicycles at stop signs and stop lights. The only usual exception made for bicycles is the allowance for riding on sidewalks or in pedestrian areas, but this is not always allowed, and usually comes with the restriction that the bicycle must be ridden at walking speed.
I will blow through a stop sign pumping or at full speed if I have a clear view of the perpindicular street and it is empty of vehicles. If there is any chance of collision (even if I arrive first) I will slow or stop to avoid the cross-traffic. You never know when somebody will blow the stop sign without looking. If I am pulled over doing this (though I also check for cops), I'll freely admit to the violation.
With the same clear view, I will generally coast through a red light.
With any obstructed view or if there is any question, I will stop or slow to a speed where I can make an emergency stop before entering the intersection.
If I am crossing an intersection using the crosswalk, I will either dismount and walk the bike, or ride at walking speed keeping a careful eye on traffic. Riding on sidewalks at high-speed is asking for trouble. Riding into intersections from sidewalks is even worse. Drivers making turns can really only realistically check the sidewalks within a few feet of the intersection, because they also have to watch for cars in the traffic lanes. A cyclist can cover much more distance at speed and enter the intersection into the driver's path between the time the driver checks the sidewalks and when they make their turn.
When driving, I stop at all stop signs and traffic lights.
I recognize that I am violating the law on the bicycle, but because I'm not driving a lethal multi-ton missile, I do not feel I'm putting anyone but myself at risk. When the risks are minimal (clear visibility and no traffic) I will assume them to save some time and effort.
The OP's idea of legalizing this risk-taking is a terrible one. The law should encourage safety over convenience. Cyclists should be instructed to stop at all marked intersections and therefore be aware that they are taking their life in their own hands if they fail to follow traffic signals. Especially in dense urban environments with heavy traffic, poor road conditions, and numerous obstructions, cyclists should follow traffic signals. It is not worth risking your life to save a few minutes on the commute and a little effort pumping back up to speed. After all, isn't the extra exercise an added benefit? Yes, I'm annoyed when I miss a light or a guy pulls up to an intersection I expected to be empty, but getting a little extra exercise is lots better than blowing all that brake pad material and gas that a motorist would have to use decelerating and then pushing their huge metal box up to speed again.
I challenge the OP to cite the relevant laws in this supposed "one state" which make special exceptions for bicycles at stop signs and stop lights.
Idaho. Not really that great of a challenge, in fact, when proponents are trying to get one passed in their state, they often refer to is as an "Idaho-style" stop sign law.
In neighbouring city Hamilton, Ontario, the cycling committee proposed changes to the Highway Traffic Act to permit "Idaho Stops". Adrian Duyzer explains in Raise the Hammer: that "An 'Idaho stop' is so-called because of a 1982 law passed in Idaho that permits, in essence, cyclists to treat stop signs like yield signs."
There is absolutely nothing dangerous about running a red light or stop sign in NYC if the intersection is clear. You need to consider bicycles have much better visibility then autos. I usually tower over cars as I stand and watch the intersection. I can normally see quite a way, usually as far as the next intersection. The speed limit here is also much lower then most suburban posters here are used to. Yes, people drive faster, but you can only get so much speed between intersections plus obstacles, nothing like suburban roads. New York drivers must constantly be alert for surprises of all kinds.
The thing is, people realize this. In a city like NYC where there are lights back to back, synchronized to keep cars at a certain speed on primary routes, or randomly set up to slow traffic, it doesn't make sense to stop in order to make good time.
The cyclists who blow lights at full speed are taking a risk and I don't suggest this. What I suggest is a yield. Here in NYC 99% of cyclists do not stop at red lights. In fact it's often safer to cross ahead of the oncoming rush of traffic stopped at the light. Sometimes 7 lanes of it!
But I just don't think it's right to fine a bicycle the same. I strongly feel a yield is adequate. This is my only bike law beef. I fully support ticketing wrong way riders, sidewalk riders (unless good reason) and those lacking lights at night.
Quick read from above link:
Quote:
Take a simple stop sign. For a car driver, a stop sign is a minor inconvenience, merely requiring the driver to shift his foot from gas pedal to brake, perhaps change gears, and, of course, slow down. These annoyances may induce drivers to choose faster routes without stop signs, leaving the stop-signed roads emptier for cyclists. Consequently streets with many stop signs are safer for bicycle riders because they have less traffic. However, a route lined with stop signs is not necessarily desirable for cyclists. While car drivers simply sigh at the delay, bicyclists have a whole lot more at stake when they reach a stop sign.
Bicyclists can work only so hard. The average commuting rider is unlikely to produce more than 100 watts of propulsion power, or about what it takes to power a reading lamp. At 100 watts, the average cyclist can travel about 12.5 miles per hour on the level.... Even if a commuter cyclist could produce more than a 100 watts, she is unlikely to do so because this would force her to sweat heavily, which is a problem for any cyclist without a place to shower at work. With only 100 watts’ worth (compared to 100,000 watts generated by a 150-horsepower car engine), bicyclists must husband their power. Accelerating from stops is strenuous, particularly since most cyclists feel a compulsion to regain their former speed quickly. They also have to pedal hard to get the bike moving forward fast enough to avoid falling down while rapidly upshifting to get back up to speed.
For example, on a street with a stop sign every 300 feet, calculations predict that the average speed of a 150-pound rider putting out 100 watts of power will diminish by about forty percent. If the bicyclist wants to maintain her average speed of 12.5 mph while still coming to a complete stop at each sign, she has to increase her output power to almost 500 watts. This is well beyond the ability of all but the most fit cyclists.
Question, how does the law dictate red lights and stop signs where you live?
In NYC, cyclists are treated as automobiles and must stop and wait for green. If you are caught you face the same fines as drivers and points on your license.
I feel this is ridiculous. Here in NYC, there are lights and stop signs everywhere. I honestly feel a yield, cross when clear is adequate for these situations.
I say these because unlike a car you loose momentum from stopping, and one of the best purposes to use a bike here is quick transportation.
I'll be honest, I run them all time. In fact nearly everyone does unless it is not safe to cross.
Opinions?
All states class bicycles as "vehicles" same as any motor vehicle so the laws for them are the same. Generally these laws are ignored when it comes to bicycles but they still apply.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
