BikePGH unveils "Bikeway" plan (Pittsburgh, Penn: land, ticket, rain)

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by tclifton

See my above post:

"Bikes can be deadly weapons when they do unexpected things like not obey traffic signs/laws and cause cars to take evasive actions that put the safety of others at risk."

Right, because a car can be a lethal weapon.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by gortonator

I do. I love momentum. But I won't do dangerous things to maintain it ...

Right, I'll stop my bike if there are cars in the intersection. Because it is either me or the car...not both. But if there is no car...

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

Right, I'll stop my bike if there are cars in the intersection. Because it is either me or the car...not both. But if there is no car...

I wish PA would just adopt the Idaho Stop.

[airwave09]

Originally Posted by tclifton

Bikes can be deadly weapons when they do unexpected things like not obey traffic signs/laws and cause cars to take evasive actions that put the safety of others at risk.

Pedestrians can technically do the same thing, should they follow the same laws as motorized traffic?

[airwave09]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

As a cyclist, then you know about momentum. You don't want to lose it if it is unnecessary. Bike riding would become an incredible chore if the letter of the law is followed. And I've noticed that even the police bend the rules on their bikes.

The police bend the rules in every situation, they are human too.

[tclifton]

Originally Posted by airwave09

Pedestrians can technically do the same thing, should they follow the same laws as motorized traffic?

Meaning should they not cross the street on a red light, yes of course.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by tclifton

Meaning should they not cross the street on a red light, yes of course.

That reminds me of when I was in Germany. They can cross a street only with the traffic signal being green. My German friend thought the law was silly to enforce. I recall seeing Germans crossing the street on a Sunday morning, pretty much no traffic, with a guilty look on their face as they crossed on the red. But really, to wait is silly, when there is no traffic and it is perfectly safe to cross. I feel the same way when bike riding. If it is clearly safe, I'll ignore the lights and signs, yes I'm picking a choosing when to obey and when not to. No one is harmed, especially me. Stopping and starting on a bike will wear you out but I'm not taking as reason to give it up and drive instead.

[ctoocheck]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

That reminds me of when I was in Germany. They can cross a street only with the traffic signal being green. My German friend thought the law was silly to enforce. I recall seeing Germans crossing the street on a Sunday morning, pretty much no traffic, with a guilty look on their face as they crossed on the red. But really, to wait is silly, when there is no traffic and it is perfectly safe to cross. I feel the same way when bike riding. If it is clearly safe, I'll ignore the lights and signs, yes I'm picking a choosing when to obey and when not to. No one is harmed, especially me. Stopping and starting on a bike will wear you out but I'm not taking as reason to give it up and drive instead.

But at the same time, Germans seem to have fewer signalized or signed intersections that in the US. I think much of it has to do with Germans being fine with kids being out and about town on their own, and setting a good example for them since they their ability to judge traffic openings is not as keen.
They also seem to have far fewer stop signs; when you come to an intersection it's obvious you should look carefully and yield to traffic there first – and there's generally less car traffic at that.

That said, yes: the Idaho stop is the way to go.

[ctoocheck]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

I'm also tiring of cyclists here who will pass me on the right and then park IN FRONT of me at every red light along a given street so I have to keep struggling to avoid a head-on collision while trying to pass them over and over again while giving them their required four-foot buffer on roads that are in dire need of widening.

This is a thing that is done to increase visibility for people on bikes, who are more vulnerable to getting hurt by multi-ton vehicles. Many cities have "bike boxes" at lights that explicitly encourage bikes to stop at the front of the queue.

[BobMcKelvin]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

That reminds me of when I was in Germany. They can cross a street only with the traffic signal being green. My German friend thought the law was silly to enforce. I recall seeing Germans crossing the street on a Sunday morning, pretty much no traffic, with a guilty look on their face as they crossed on the red. But really, to wait is silly, when there is no traffic and it is perfectly safe to cross. I feel the same way when bike riding. If it is clearly safe, I'll ignore the lights and signs, yes I'm picking a choosing when to obey and when not to. No one is harmed, especially me. Stopping and starting on a bike will wear you out but I'm not taking as reason to give it up and drive instead.

This is a good analogy. Just as pedestrians will often judge for themselves whether it's safe to cross (jaywalk), cyclists face the same decision. While technically "illegal" in both cases, I don't see a problem with it since the one taking all the risk is the one least protected in the event of a vehicle collision and I'm glad police really don't enforce either. There's a big difference between being careless and taking a calculated risk. Those who are unable to adequately judge the risk and end up getting hit only have themselves to blame and the law should reflect that and absolve the motorist of blame in those situations.

Getting upset isn't worth it, usually if you are being repassed multiple times it means you're in a dense part of the city or there's enough traffic where cycling is just as fast as (or faster than) driving. Tortoise and the hare, if you will. All in all it's part of living in a city. Sometimes you get stuck behind a bus, sometimes a bike, sometimes an inconsiderate jaywalker. Sometimes your lane is blocked by a delivery truck or construction vehicles, and other times you're stuck behind an old lady, a new driver, or just someone unfamiliar with their location. Relax! It'll all be okay, you'll get there eventually. And if you can't handle that, there are plenty of places to live where there's virtually no one to get in your way and you can drive as fast as you want to any place you need to go.

As I've said before I used to have very similar views as SCR and others then I began biking (I still drive) and can see things very differently now. So often you see aggressive maneuvers and upset drivers just to catch back up to them a half a mile later at the next red light. As a cyclist it's stupid to sit in a line of traffic and breathe exhaust fumes for 3 light cycles when you can safely move towards the front of the line. It's stupid to fully stop at 4 way stops in residential neighborhoods when you have a full range of vision and hearing to warn you of oncoming vehicles. Just as it's stupid for a pedestrian to wait 2 minutes to cross when they can see a quarter mile in every direction and note that it's safe and clear to cross, and stupid for them to walk a block out of their way to find a crosswalk if it's obviously safe to cross here and now. Just as large, heavy vehicles are subject to different rules of the road based on the potential risk to others in case something goes wrong cars are also subject to different rules than cyclists for the same reason. The law may not explicitly state that, but clearly the police recognize that it's not worth their time prosecuting a cyclist for running a stop sign in most cases because it's really not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.