(2020) Motorists Break Law To Save Time, Cyclists Break Law To Save Lives, Finds Study

www.forbes.com Motorists Break Law To Save Time, Cyclists Break Law To Save Lives, Finds Study

archived copy
(JSTOR) Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

You're viewing a single thread.

42 comments

Big surprise of the day! /s
I think anyone who advocates for cycling and pedestrian safety have been saying this for decades.
This is also why it's incredibly frustrating to have things like permitting Idaho Stops being pushed back so aggressively.
It keeps cyclists safe, but motorists argue that "everyone should be following the same laws"... except that 99% of motorists are ALREADY doing Idaho Stops, despite it being illegal for them to do so!
And pedestrians who don't like cyclists on sidewalks. Yes, we get it! No cyclist wants to be on a bumpy, slow, narrow sidewalk. But it's safer than on a road without cycling infrastructure! If you don't like it, support bike lanes!
- Are you calling "rolling stops" "Idaho stops"? I have never heard that and have lived on both coasts including WA. Interesting
  
  Are you calling “rolling stops” “Idaho stops”?
  So, depending on the state, an "Idaho Stop" can mean a few things.
  But generally speaking, it allows cyclists to use red lights like stop signs, and stop signs like yield signs - both provided that the way is clear and the appropriate right of way is given to anyone else at those intersections.
  It's been around since the early 1980s, and several US states have legalized it. Canada - like, all of Canada - refuses to.
  Idaho Stops not only make it safer for cyclists (proven through many studies over the last few decades), but it also decriminalizes cyclists who want to clear an empty, red light intersection where they would otherwise be stranded unless a car also stops at the red.
  And with more people using cargo bikes, pulling kids on trailers, commuting, or running errands, it can save energy by keeping some momentum going as a cyclist approaches an empty intersection.
  There are almost no downsides to permitting Idaho Stops, other than the need to educate drivers that what cyclists are doing is safe, and permitted.
  since the early 1980s*
  
  need to educate drivers
  this is one of the big ones that shows up in our car-centric worldview – just sticking to motorized vehicles: truck drivers are expected to know truck rules, car rules, and motorcycle rules – motorcyclists are expected to know motorcycling rules, car rules, and truck rules – car drivers are expected to know car rules and that’s it
  when the majority of our population doesn’t know about (and subsequently doesn’t care about) anything else sharing the road with them … car drivers that are just as aggressive towards motorcyclists as they are towards bicyclists, car drivers are completely oblivious to stopping distances and momentum of big rigs …
  
  When I bike and have to use car infrastructure, I want the cars to behave predictably so that I can avoid any collisions. There is a commute that I have been doing the past few years where I have to approach a 4 way stop except the direction I come from is bikes only. Drivers could never figure out how to react. Some would completely yield, some would ignore me, and others would follow the road rules and wait their turn. This is probably one of the worst intersections I went through on a regular basis. To make the intersection even more crazy, the cars had dedicated right turn lanes, at this stop sign, making drivers think they can just ignore the road rules and turn right when it was not their turn.
  
  since the early 1980s*
  
  Noted and corrected 👍
  
  I’ve heard the term, but a better one is just “not actually stopping”
  
  Pretty sure they call rolling stops "California stops" in Idaho.

42 comments