What is wrong with cyclists?! From a cyclist.

[Beric01]

I've been riding my bicycle full-time for about a month (no car). At first I thought most road rage by drivers at cyclists was unjustified, but now I'm not so sure.

I've realized there's 3 types of cyclists (and yes, I'm stereotyping here):

• The "decked out" cyclists. These guys are decked out in their expensive bike clothing riding multi-thousand dollar bikes. Oh, and they think the road. Seriously, if I come across a "decked-out" cyclist, I WILL see them run a red light. Or two. Or all of them. Oh, and every single stop sign too. You'd think if these guys were so athletic, they'd at least have the physical strength to start up from a complete stop. But that's the problem with these guys - they're wimps. They don't signal because everyone else should know what they're doing. When you're parked on a red light at an busy intersection where they can't run the red, they will pass you and park on the crosswalk in front of you. And yet I'm a fast cyclist and will quickly need to pass them thereafter.
• The "clueless" (I'm going to be nice here). These people ride the wrong way in bike lanes, straight at you. Their bikes are complete trash, and they seem to not be far removed from it. They can't seem to ride in straight lines and are all over the road. They're wearing headphones and they can't hear a thing around them. They're actually safer than some though, because since they're so reckless cars give them a wide berth. They have no safety gear, and love riding in all black with no lights or reflectors at night.
• The "honest cyclist". Sadly, these people are few and far between (and I'm elitist enough to call myself one of them). We wear everyday clothes and ride affordable, if well-maintained bikes. We follow the law, meaning stop signs aren't optional. We signal when applicable. We respect drivers and don't think we own the road. And we care about safety, which includes proper safety gear.

As you can tell, I'm a bit annoyed by cyclists, being one myself. But is the above not even a little correct? I'd love to hear from others - note I live in Silicon Valley.

[Undecided]

Maybe when you have some more experience, you'll see a bit more nuance in things.

[frugalnacho]

I feel like most stop signs are just suggestions and only useful if there is other traffic.  What's the problem if I roll through a stop sign at 12mph when I can see a quarter mile up the street in all directions and know well ahead of time that there will be no one even close to the intersection when I go through it?  What's the point in actually coming to a complete stop, just to follow the letter of the law?

If there is other traffic then I follow the law and behave like a vehicle (meaning I stop at stop signs and wait my turn).

I also notice a lot of people out biking at night with no lights and shitty (or none) reflectors.  They always look homeless and/or drunk. 

[thepokercab]

Everything you laid out could apply exactly to drivers as well. 

Basically, there are assholes, no matter what type of transportation they use. 

[Beric01]

Maybe when you have some more experience, you'll see a bit more nuance in things.

I've been riding bikes in the Valley for 10 years. Yet, it's stereotyping, but it seems pretty accurate to me. Please share this nuance.

The one that annoys me the the most the breaking the law. Us cyclists want to get treated like cars. But last time I checked, red lights and stop signs aren't optional for cars! A bicycle is for all intents a car. So it should act like one.

I'm seriously almost wanting licenses to be required for bicycling. We're never going to be taken seriously is we keep acting like this. A bicycle is a superior form of transportation. Act like it!

I feel like most stop signs are just suggestions and only useful if there is other traffic.  What's the problem if I roll through a stop sign at 12mph when I can see a quarter mile up the street in all directions and know well ahead of time that there will be no one even close to the intersection when I go through it?  What's the point in actually coming to a complete stop, just to follow the letter of the law?

If there is other traffic then I follow the law and behave like a vehicle (meaning I stop at stop signs and wait my turn).

I also notice a lot of people out biking at night with no lights and shitty (or none) reflectors.  They always look homeless and/or drunk.

Would you do this in a car?

You're riding on the road, like a car. The laws for cars apply to you. You should follow the rules like a car.

Everything you laid out could apply exactly to drivers as well. 

Basically, there are assholes, no matter what type of transportation they use.

The problem is, I see problems with >50% of bicyclists, whereas only 10% or less of cars. There's something going on.

[Undecided]

Maybe when you have some more experience, you'll see a bit more nuance in things.

I've been riding bikes in the Valley for 10 years. Yet, it's stereotyping, but it seems pretty accurate to me. Please share this nuance.

The one that annoys me the the most the breaking the law. Us cyclists want to get treated like cars. But last time I checked, red lights and stop signs aren't optional for cars! A bicycle is for all intents a car. So it should act like one.

I'm seriously almost wanting licenses to be required for bicycling. We're never going to be taken seriously is we keep acting like this. A bicycle is a superior form of transportation. Act like it!

I feel like most stop signs are just suggestions and only useful if there is other traffic.  What's the problem if I roll through a stop sign at 12mph when I can see a quarter mile up the street in all directions and know well ahead of time that there will be no one even close to the intersection when I go through it?  What's the point in actually coming to a complete stop, just to follow the letter of the law?

If there is other traffic then I follow the law and behave like a vehicle (meaning I stop at stop signs and wait my turn).

I also notice a lot of people out biking at night with no lights and shitty (or none) reflectors.  They always look homeless and/or drunk.

Would you do this in a car?

You're riding on the road, like a car. The laws for cars apply to you. You should follow the rules like a car.

Everything you laid out could apply exactly to drivers as well. 

Basically, there are assholes, no matter what type of transportation they use.

The problem is, I see problems with >50% of bicyclists, whereas only 10% or less of cars. There's something going on.

Coincidentally, although I don't live there any longer, I spent more than a decade living, and riding (>15k miles/year) and racing bikes, in Silicon Valley. I'm still pretty familiar with all the major group rides in the mid-Pen area, and certainly all the classic rides around there. While there are certainly folks who do it all wrong, I think they're a distinct minority, and if you only see problems with 10% of car drivers, I think you're applying inappropriate standards or leniency in one case of the other. Like frugalnacho, considering the vastly lower potential harm a cyclist can inflict, I don't have a problem with one responsibly departing from rules that were, as you point out, written for cars (although even so I think there's far less of that than you seem to see). Although I have to agree that there are some extreme cases of idiocy, and you can find any number of inexperienced riders on expensive bikes in the area, there are a lot of people (riding a lot more miles) who know what they're doing and have and use reasonable judgment (which may not be consistent with the law). And who says U.S. riders "want to get treated like cars"? I just want to get treated reasonably as what I am---an unprotected human being on a slower moving vehicle that takes up almost no room and spends more than 99% of the time not even remotely in the way of a driver.

[frugalnacho]

Would you do this in a car?

You're riding on the road, like a car. The laws for cars apply to you. You should follow the rules like a car.

No.  From my experience cops will ticket you for doing it in a car, but they don't ticket people on bikes for doing.  If there was no possibility of getting a ticket while in a car then yes I would roll through stop signs when I am confident it is safe to do so.

[luigi49]

My wife and son(school) rides a lot.  I don't think they should be treated like a car around stop light or sign  if there are no cars around.   They both yield to cars and stay out of their way when there is heavy traffic. 

[Beric01]

I thought I would add in this article.

Following recent high-profile cycling deaths in Ontario, results of a poll suggest four in five Canadians think until more cyclists respect the rules of the road, they won’t be able to gain the respect of motorists.

We're hurting ourselves by breaking the laws of the road in more ways than one. This needs to stop, or we're never going to get cycling accepted.

[Angie55]

While I disagree on the full stop at stop signs and lights. I do slow down look both ways twice to ensure no one is coming before proceeding. I do realize it is illegal and will accept if I am ticketed. I accept the injury risk in doing so also. That said, if I had to make a full stop at every single light and stop sign on my way to work it would almost double the time. I would then just commute by car instead.


However, 90% of the time if I slow at a 4-way stop and there is a car they won't go on their turn without me waving them past. They EXPECT me to run through the stop sign. I guess that's good in that they are paying attention. But it can get quite annoying when we are playing the wave game. Go ahead. No you go. No its your turn dammit!

[frugalnacho]

While I disagree on the full stop at stop signs and lights. I do slow down look both ways twice to ensure no one is coming before proceeding. I do realize it is illegal and will accept if I am ticketed. I accept the injury risk in doing so also. That said, if I had to make a full stop at every single light and stop sign on my way to work it would almost double the time. I would then just commute by car instead.


However, 90% of the time if I slow at a 4-way stop and there is a car they won't go on their turn without me waving them past. They EXPECT me to run through the stop sign. I guess that's good in that they are paying attention. But it can get quite annoying when we are playing the wave game. Go ahead. No you go. No its your turn dammit!

Yeah I hate the waving game in all forms.  We already have a set of laws to determine who fucking goes next! Just go on your damn turn and stop waving around!

For every car that I see paying attention and expecting me to run a stop sign I see 10 that are oblivious to everyone and everything.

[Eric]

As another Silicon Valley cyclist, I would say my experience is the opposite of yours Beric01.  The VAST majority of bikers I see are following the law.  I was in the Midwest recently.  I saw more people riding against traffic with no helmets and generally riding like idiots in one week than I've seen in my 5 years here.  (and I'm a daily commuter of 7+ miles each way, so I'm out there everyday)

[Undecided]

While I disagree on the full stop at stop signs and lights. I do slow down look both ways twice to ensure no one is coming before proceeding. I do realize it is illegal and will accept if I am ticketed. I accept the injury risk in doing so also. That said, if I had to make a full stop at every single light and stop sign on my way to work it would almost double the time. I would then just commute by car instead.


However, 90% of the time if I slow at a 4-way stop and there is a car they won't go on their turn without me waving them past. They EXPECT me to run through the stop sign. I guess that's good in that they are paying attention. But it can get quite annoying when we are playing the wave game. Go ahead. No you go. No its your turn dammit!

Yeah I hate the waving game in all forms.  We already have a set of laws to determine who fucking goes next! Just go on your damn turn and stop waving around!

For every car that I see paying attention and expecting me to run a stop sign I see 10 that are oblivious to everyone and everything.

4/5 cyclists I've asked said they'll respect car drivers only when they start following the rules of the road.

[Beric01]

No.  From my experience cops will ticket you for doing it in a car, but they don't ticket people on bikes for doing.  If there was no possibility of getting a ticket while in a car then yes I would roll through stop signs when I am confident it is safe to do so.

Do you also cheat on your taxes when you don't think you'll be caught?

As another Silicon Valley cyclist, I would say my experience is the opposite of yours Beric01.  The VAST majority of bikers I see are following the law.  I was in the Midwest recently.  I saw more people riding against traffic with no helmets and generally riding like idiots in one week than I've seen in my 5 years here.  (and I'm a daily commuter of 7+ miles each way, so I'm out there everyday)

Yeah, I'm in San Jose downtown, so it may attract more lawbreakers.

Anyway, I'm thinking about sporting this T-shirt when out cycling:

[TeresaB]

I do the rolling stop (ie slow down to almost stopped, and go) thing on bikes and in cars (especially stick shifts) if there's no one around AND I have a really good view. What I don't understand is the crazy red light running I've seen cyclists engaging in (left turn on red? really?).

[Beric01]

I do the rolling stop (ie slow down to almost stopped, and go) thing on bikes and in cars (especially stick shifts) if there's no one around AND I have a really good view. What I don't understand is the crazy red light running I've seen cyclists engaging in (left turn on red? really?).

Exactly. These crazy ones are out of hand.

The worse offense I've seen was actually in Sunnyvale. Both directions were making left turns at a light. A cyclist starts from the far right bike lane and rides diagonally across the middle of the intersection to the diagonally opposite bike lane, squeezing between the two directions turning left by inches.

He essentially completed a left turn, in an incredibly dangerous way.

[John74]

Bless the honest cyclists. Unfortunately there are too many decked out cyclists out there.

[Angie55]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

[Eric]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

Depends on if they're set up to recognize that I'm there.  If I'm just supposed to sit there and wait for 10 minutes in the hope that another car comes up and triggers the light, then fuck that.  Otherwise, if the light is on a normal cycle, of course I wait.  I think pretty much everyone I've ever seen does too.

[cbgg]

Maybe it's because I live in a good bike city, or maybe I'm just less self righteous than others, but I really don't see that many problems with cyclists (or motorists) when I'm on the road.  Sure, people make stupid mistakes every so often (myself included), but the majority of cyclists I see are riding in a way that's reasonably safe and courteous.

The only big problem I see is people who choose to ride at night without lights.  It's so unsafe.  I don't think these people understand how difficult they are to see from a car.  But still, is the minority of riders.

I also disagree with OPs stance on stop signs.  I'll yield the right of way at a stop sign when necessary, but I will never stop at a 4 way if there are no other cars.  Most of the rules of the road were made for drivers and stopping for no reason makes no sense for a biker.

[CanuckExpat]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

Pros
- Because of the positive externalities of cycling, bicycle laws should be designed to allow cyclists to travel swiftly and easily, and this provision allows for the conservation of energy.
- By allowing cyclist to get in front of traffic, they become more visible, and in so doing, more safe.
- Current laws were written for cars, and unlike cars, it is easy for cyclists to yield the right-of-way without coming to a complete stop. Because cyclists are moving slower, have stereoscopic hearing, have no blind spots and can stop and maneuver more quickly than cars, current traffic control device laws don't make sense for cyclists.
- With the Idaho stop, at special intersections where lights are controlled by sensing equipment, there is no need to provide extra equipment for cyclists.
- The stop-as-yield provision reduces conflict between neighborhood traffic-calming advocates wanting more stop signs and bicycle commuters.
- Changing the legal duties of cyclists would provide direction to law enforcement to focus their attention where it belongs—on unsafe cyclists (and motorists).
- The usual law forces cyclists to choose between routes that are more efficient but less safe due to higher traffic volumes, and routes that are more safe, but less efficient due to the presence of numerous stop signs. Allowing cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs empowers them to legally make the safer routes more efficient.
- The only study done on the safety of the Idaho Stop shows that it is slightly safer.

Cons
- The provision relies on the judgement of cyclists, but children ride bikes and lack the judgement to do this maneuver safely.
- Allowing cyclists to behave by a separate set of rules makes them less predictable and thus, less safe.

[GuitarStv]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

Depends on if they're set up to recognize that I'm there.  If I'm just supposed to sit there and wait for 10 minutes in the hope that another car comes up and triggers the light, then fuck that.  Otherwise, if the light is on a normal cycle, of course I wait.  I think pretty much everyone I've ever seen does too.

I wait on red lights all the time.  I've become pretty good about figuring out the cuts in the road to trigger left turn signals as well.

My experience with different types of cyclists is that they all follow/break laws at about the same rate.  The spandex crew may run more reds, but you never see them on sidewalks causing accidents (something extremely common amoung the regular dressed folks).

[Mrs. PoP]

Would you do this in a car?

You're riding on the road, like a car. The laws for cars apply to you. You should follow the rules like a car.

No.  From my experience cops will ticket you for doing it in a car, but they don't ticket people on bikes for doing.  If there was no possibility of getting a ticket while in a car then yes I would roll through stop signs when I am confident it is safe to do so.

I was pulled over and received a written warning after doing the slow-down and roll through at a 3 way stop where there were no cars on the road and I even had great visibility, including being able to see the motorcycle cop a little ways from the intersection parked off the road on the sidewalk.  I saw him and STILL rolled through it because I knew it was safe and thought it was okay for bikes to do so.  He clocked me at 8mph rolling past the stop sign.  That motorcycle cop pulled me over about 45 seconds later. 

Tickets for that are $300+ around here, so I was glad to get the written warning.  (I think it helped somewhat that a stranger walking his dog gave the cop a hard time asking what he would have to do to get pulled over.)  Needless to say, I no longer slow down and roll through.  I stop.  Every. Time. 

I have friends who are really active in the biking community here and they were appalled that this happened, but the cop had every right to do it.  I broke the law... 

[waltworks]

Bikes = pretty much just a danger to themselves.
Cars = danger to everyone.

This is why cops generally don't ticket people running stop signs. For better or worse, cyclists don't pose much danger to other road users and why I generally feel that I can disobey some traffic laws if I feel it's safe on my bike. If I'm wrong, it's gonna be me splattered if I don't see that oncoming car. In my SUV, on the other hand, not seeing another vehicle could mean the folks in the other car all die.

-W

[CanuckExpat]

The problem is, I see problems with >50% of bicyclists, whereas only 10% or less of cars. There's something going on.

This if from Brooklyn only, but "88% of Cars Speeding" and presumably if we're in the the "law is the law" camp, speeding is as much a traffic violation as rolling through a stop-sign.

Oddly enough, there are 10,000+ plus fatal crashes involving speeding motorists annually; I don't know the number for cyclists rolling through stop signs, but I assume it is lower..

I've also yet to break a speed limit on my bicycle, even on the bike path, but I am pretty slow :(

[PindyStache]

I've been riding my bicycle full-time for about a month (no car). At first I thought most road rage by drivers at cyclists was unjustified, but now I'm not so sure.

I've realized there's 3 types of cyclists (and yes, I'm stereotyping here):

Yes! I am with you OP! I agree with some other posters that there is a bit more nuance in terms of who within these categories obeys/disobeys "the rules," but have myself spent undue time (usually during the 2ish hours per day I am on a bike) musing over such classifications. I would add a fourth archetype:

4. The "Casual." These folks are out for a ride around the lake or something, with pretty nice gear that looks very shiny from being used maybe once a month. They go slow, wear helmets and arm pads, and go to odd lengths to avoid riding their bikes on the street, often traveling between sidewalks (which is legal here, if still ill-advised for everyone's safety) and bike paths. Usually they are content to live and let live, but occasionally ride in packs or rent obnoxious "family bikes" that take up the entire bike path. They may try to signal but are often not very well coordinated in doing so, so you wonder if it's really safe for them to be taking their hand off the bars.

I've certainly engaged in a few perhaps-questionable-after-the-fact encounters with motor vehicle drivers on general road etiquette, but what truly raises my ire are the cyclists who cut me and cars off at stop signs, blaze past/through red lights only to be (again) passed themselves, or who leap-frog on the paths because they are motivated to pass but can't keep up the pace!

[NoraLenderbee]

As another Silicon Valley cyclist, I would say my experience is the opposite of yours Beric01.  The VAST majority of bikers I see are following the law.  I was in the Midwest recently.  I saw more people riding against traffic with no helmets and generally riding like idiots in one week than I've seen in my 5 years here.  (and I'm a daily commuter of 7+ miles each way, so I'm out there everyday)

I live and ride  in Silicon Valley, too, and my experience is closer to Eric's. Most of the cyclists I see obey most of the laws most of the time. They are pretty similar to motorists in that respect. There are certainly some egregious violations by both types of drivers.

What people wear riding does not reflect their character. Wearing a team jersey and fancy shoes doesn't make a cyclist not-honest, or morally inferior to someone wearing street clothes.

[franklin w. dixon]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

I mean, obviously it depends on the intersection and situation but the real answer is: only on the internet, the same place where presumably the same schmucks ride at a heady 12 mph dead center in the 45 mph lane because that's my right! Under the law! THE LAW!!

[Beric01]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

I mean, obviously it depends on the intersection and situation but the real answer is: only on the internet, the same place where presumably the same schmucks ride at a heady 12 mph dead center in the 45 mph lane because that's my right! Under the law! THE LAW!!

Actually that's illegal - it's driving at an unsafe speed/obstructing traffic, and you'll get pulled over for that if there's a decent officer around.

And yes, I do wait through ALL red lights. Ones without a bike sensor, I press the crosswalk button, assuming there's no other cars around to trigger the signal.

[franklin w. dixon]

Principled Internet Bicyclist all sitting there growing old and gray because it's one of the intersections where the light doesn't change color until unless there's a car on the pressure plate. Guess I just have to go home then! *instantly dies from the shame of executing an illegal u-turn*

[Beric01]

Principled Internet Bicyclist all sitting there growing old and gray because it's one of the intersections where the light doesn't change color until unless there's a car on the pressure plate. Guess I just have to go home then! *instantly dies from the shame of executing an illegal u-turn*

Use the crosswalk button.

[franklin w. dixon]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

I mean, obviously it depends on the intersection and situation but the real answer is: only on the internet, the same place where presumably the same schmucks ride at a heady 12 mph dead center in the 45 mph lane because that's my right! Under the law! THE LAW!!

Actually that's illegal - it's driving at an unsafe speed/obstructing traffic, and you'll get pulled over for that if there's a decent officer around.

And yes, I do wait through ALL red lights. Ones without a bike sensor, I press the crosswalk button, assuming there's no other cars around to trigger the signal.

Actually, what constitutes "illegal" in situations like that is completely arbitrary and at the discretion of individual police officers and then, if it comes to it, a court. If, for instance, you just pedaled sloowwwwly past the sign that says "Bicycles Can Use Full Lane," you stand a pretty good chance of convincing a judge to toss an obstructing traffic ticket. But the larger point is that traffic laws are in large part a mushy hodgepodge of interpretation and reasonableness (in the minds of roadgoers, police, and the courts), and the largest point is that Internet Rule Robots arrogate the title to World's Most Law Abidingest Rule Follower which is almost certainly false, and laughable even if it's true that you really really never put your front wheel in the crosswalk or whatever, sinless Christ among we mere mortal roadgoers.

[franklin w. dixon]

Principled Internet Bicyclist all sitting there growing old and gray because it's one of the intersections where the light doesn't change color until unless there's a car on the pressure plate. Guess I just have to go home then! *instantly dies from the shame of executing an illegal u-turn*

Use the crosswalk button.

Which exists! At every last intersection across this blessed land! Probably!

[NoraLenderbee]

My, someone sounds defensive.

[Beric01]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

Pros
- Because of the positive externalities of cycling, bicycle laws should be designed to allow cyclists to travel swiftly and easily, and this provision allows for the conservation of energy.
- By allowing cyclist to get in front of traffic, they become more visible, and in so doing, more safe.
- Current laws were written for cars, and unlike cars, it is easy for cyclists to yield the right-of-way without coming to a complete stop. Because cyclists are moving slower, have stereoscopic hearing, have no blind spots and can stop and maneuver more quickly than cars, current traffic control device laws don't make sense for cyclists.
- With the Idaho stop, at special intersections where lights are controlled by sensing equipment, there is no need to provide extra equipment for cyclists.
- The stop-as-yield provision reduces conflict between neighborhood traffic-calming advocates wanting more stop signs and bicycle commuters.
- Changing the legal duties of cyclists would provide direction to law enforcement to focus their attention where it belongs—on unsafe cyclists (and motorists).
- The usual law forces cyclists to choose between routes that are more efficient but less safe due to higher traffic volumes, and routes that are more safe, but less efficient due to the presence of numerous stop signs. Allowing cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs empowers them to legally make the safer routes more efficient.
- The only study done on the safety of the Idaho Stop shows that it is slightly safer.

Cons
- The provision relies on the judgement of cyclists, but children ride bikes and lack the judgement to do this maneuver safely.
- Allowing cyclists to behave by a separate set of rules makes them less predictable and thus, less safe.

So in other words, lazy cyclists don't want to follow the same rules as everyone else.

It's really not that hard to come to a complete stop and get up to full speed again. Takes me 10-20 seconds (I cruise around 15-20mph). I actually am faster across an intersection than a car. Standing on your pedals really helps!

Actually, what constitutes "illegal" in situations like that is completely arbitrary and at the discretion of individual police officers and then, if it comes to it, a court. If, for instance, you just pedaled sloowwwwly past the sign that says "Bicycles Can Use Full Lane," you stand a pretty good chance of convincing a judge to toss an obstructing traffic ticket. But the larger point is that traffic laws are in large part a mushy hodgepodge of interpretation and reasonableness (in the minds of roadgoers, police, and the courts), and the largest point is that Internet Rule Robots arrogate the title to World's Most Law Abidingest Rule Follower which is almost certainly false, and laughable even if it's true that you really really never put your front wheel in the crosswalk or whatever, sinless Christ among we mere mortal roadgoers.

So to summarize: when on the road, do whatever you feel like, because nobody else knows/follows the law anyways? Sounds complicated, confusing, and ready for a mess.

How about something simple:

• Stop at stop signs.
• Stop at red lights.

See that red sign? Notice some words on it? It means stop. Not slow down, not yield, stop. Same thing for red lights.

It's a really simple rule. It's easy to follow. I manage to do it, and it takes a few extra seconds.

If you're so concerned about efficiency, How about riding faster? You can then get somewhere in the same time, and yet legally. My favorite thing is when I'm stopped at a red light, and a cyclist passes me. The light turns green, and then I end up passing the cyclist. If they just followed the law and rode faster, they'd get where they were going in the same amount of time. It proves that they really were just lazy.

[marblejane]

I'm just going to leave this here:
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/9/5691098/why-cyclists-should-be-able-to-roll-through-stop-signs-and-ride

[Beric01]

I'm just going to leave this here:
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/9/5691098/why-cyclists-should-be-able-to-roll-through-stop-signs-and-ride

Thanks for posting! Gonna just post a reply:

Unlike a car, getting a bike started from a standstill requires a lot of energy from the rider. Once it's going, the bike's own momentum carries it forward, so it requires much less energy.

Actually, starting from a stop takes a lot of energy from a car too - accelerating a car takes far more energy that maintaining speed.

He also calculated that a cyclist who rolls through a stop at five miles per hour instead of stopping fully needs to use 25 percent less energy to get back to full speed.

What a shame. They might have to work a little harder. Isn't that part of the point of bicycling - to work hard and get good exercise while still getting somewhere? And, unlike cars, increased energy consumption on a bike only means you'll eat a little more, and drink some more water. Not consume gallons of gas.

There are even a few reasons why the Idaho stop might even make the roads safer than the status quo. In many cities, the low-traffic routes that are safer for bikes are the kinds of roads with many stop signs. Currently, some cyclists avoid these routes and take faster, higher-traffic streets. If the Idaho stop were legalized, it'd get cyclists off these faster streets and funnel the bikes on to safer, slower roads.

So in other words, cyclists are so lazy they'd prefer to put their lives in danger rather than work a little harder? Interesting.

The Idaho stop, if legalized and widely adopted, would also make bikes more predictable. Currently, when a bike and a car both pull up to a four-way stop, an awkward dance often ensues. Even when cars get there first, drivers often try to give bikers the right-of-way, perhaps because they think the cyclist is going to ride through anyway.

This is why cyclists need to start following the law! Right now so many break the law that people just assume they will continue to do so. I have the same thing when I'm stopped at a stop sign - I have to wave cars who were there first through. This is how badly other lawbreaking cyclists are ruining things.

If all this sounds far-fetched to you, look at the data. Public health researcher Jason Meggs found that after Idaho started allowing bikers to do this in 1982, injuries resulting from bicycle accidents dropped. When he compared recent census data from Boise to Bakersfield and Sacramento, California — relatively similar-sized cities with comparable percentages of bikers, topographies, precipitation patterns, and street layouts — he found that Sacramento had 30.5 percent more accidents per bike commuter and Bakersfield had 150 percent more.

Correlation does not equal causation.

This sounds great, in theory, but it doesn't describe the reality of current traffic laws. Most interstate highways don't allow bicycles, for instance. Many cities have bike lanes that cars can't enter. They're clearly two different sorts of vehicles, and we have rules that apply to one but not the other.

Actually, bike lanes and no bikes on highways are basically the only that are different between cars a bikes. Bike lanes exist because they're slower. No bikes on highways is the same as no mopeds on highways - they travel too slow and would make things dangerous for drivers. That's why they can take other routes. Unless we're going to have dedicated bike paths in every city, bikes and cars will need to continue to coexist. Having different riles isn't going to help.

Laws that serve no purpose (and aren't followed) shouldn't exist

Only problem is that they DO have a purpose - they make bikes predictable  - and they ARE followed, just not by all. Part of the reason is enforcement. We need to step up enforcement of traffic laws on bicycles.

The other problem I have with that article is that nothing said in it doesn't also apply to cars. Letting cars do rolling stops saves energy, reducing fuel consumption. And the "everyone is doing it, so we should make it legal" argument is stupid. Either it's a good law or it isn't.

[Undecided]

[dragoncar]

[Hedge_87]

We have a stop sign at the end of my block that guards a road that leads to a dead end in a half a block. This is stupid! I blow through that sign every morning (bike or car) and am constantly resisting the urge to rip it out the ground and smash it repeatedly on the curb. There are several stop signs around town like this. I am not going to stop look both ways when I can clearly see there is nobody on the street.

[Angie55]

We have a stop sign at the end of my block that guards a road that leads to a dead end in a half a block. This is stupid! I blow through that sign every morning (bike or car) and am constantly resisting the urge to rip it out the ground and smash it repeatedly on the curb. There are several stop signs around town like this. I am not going to stop look both ways when I can clearly see there is nobody on the street.

We have a red light in the middle of a one way street. No cross-street or crosswalk. Its triggered by cars going too fast almost 1/2 mile before hand. I would LOVE to test all you holier than thou cyclists sit and wait in the bike lane at that light..... 20% of the cars don't even stop at it.

[thepokercab]

The other problem I have with that article is that nothing said in it doesn't also apply to cars. Letting cars do rolling stops saves energy, reducing fuel consumption. And the "everyone is doing it, so we should make it legal" argument is stupid. Either it's a good law or it isn't.

Well- i think the article does address the difference:

Cars are 2,000 pound-plus machines that, on most roads, travel at 30 miles per hour or faster. In most cases, a driver can't safely decelerate from this speed to yield to oncoming traffic at an intersection without coming to a full stop first.

Bikes are not the same as cars. 

We need to step up enforcement of traffic laws on bicycles

Really?  Why?  And at what expense?  I guess I don't understand why this is something that needs to be a priority, and why we should be viewing cars and bikes equally.  I've never been almost killed by a bike, but I can't count how many times a car has almost hit me, while walking in a cross walk because they want to roll through a right turn at a stop sign, or almost hit me walking down the crosswalk as they rush into their left hand turn.  To me its pretty clear that its more important for cars to be regulated in this fashion, and less so for bikes. 

And yes, there are some laws that just don't make sense, so people tend not to follow them, and authorities tend not to enforce them.

[db_cooper]

Idaho has got it right,  google it.

stop sign = yield
light = stop sign , proceed if clear.

Washington State at least has the red light
 part correct.  It's called the dead red law.

[hybrid]

I have the same issues with cyclists around here. The majority are doing something wrong, sometimes dreadfully wrong like biking the wrong way against traffic. Drivers have every right to be irritated with cyclists around here because too many are cycling bady and dangerously.

[Goldielocks]

Would you do this in a car?

You're riding on the road, like a car. The laws for cars apply to you. You should follow the rules like a car.

No.  From my experience cops will ticket you for doing it in a car, but they don't ticket people on bikes for doing.  If there was no possibility of getting a ticket while in a car then yes I would roll through stop signs when I am confident it is safe to do so.

I almost got a ticket for running as yellow light (that turned red just after I entered intersection) in Pleasanton, near San Francisco.  I forget what the ticket value was, but it was same as a car, nearly $400, I think.

I only got out of it because of my drivers license...  " Oh,_ you're Canadian"...  The officer said..  "Here bikes are not allowed to run red lights...."

So I NEVER run lights, but I do take some stop signs as more of a 'yield' on slower streets.

[franklin w. dixon]

My, someone sounds defensive.

I absolutely am, because every time anyone anywhere on the entire internet posts about bikes there's some Dr. Rule Dad who shows up (as we have seen) who comes to a full stop at every stop sign, and has never merged or cornered without Proper Hand Signals in his entire life, and wears sunblock even on cloudy days, and wants to condescend to everybody. And those things are (1) generally lies and (2) usually trolls and (3) even when they aren't trolls it's counterproductive to fuss fuss about gosh-darn cyclist rule breakers when the Point is and should be that in a sane world, cyclists wouldn't have to navigate ten lane 45 mph intersections in the first damn place, legally or otherwise. And as others have pointed out roads are designed for cars, and cars unlike cyclists don't have to deal with lanes "just disappearing" when you cross an intersection (for example). Riding a bicycle safely and sanely is predicated on breaking and ignoring laws, which is completely fine, because the laws weren't really for you in the first place.

I mean, as my favorite example of ole slowpoke bicycle hogging the 45 mph lane, sure, it's possible and even reasonable for a cop to reckon that's obstructing traffic. But on the other hand, it's also illegal to pass any vehicle on a two lane highway when there's a double yellow line, regardless of where it sits in the lane. The law is a contradictory unworkable pile of crap when applied to bicycles and it's best to just make peace with that. But instead, every damn thread, along comes a Dr. Rule Dad to share folksy wisdom about passing ONLY on the left and eating your vegetables.

[BlueHouse]

 When you're parked on a red light at an busy intersection where they can't run the red, they will pass you and park on the crosswalk in front of you.

I do this.  I thought I was supposed to do this so that drivers can see me.  I've recently started biking again after 30 years aways from it, so I have read the rules for my area.  I'm pretty sure I read this because it's not something I would have come up with on my own. 

[franklin w. dixon]

Also, if you peek around at the roadgoing bicyclist population of the globe, you will find that most of them are not in fact enormous dudes with calves of steel who crack 30mph on the flats, but rather, regular people who go pretty slow and mostly just poke along! Not here though. Here we get the enormo buff bike guys who can ride very fast and usually on expensive bicycles, and then "everybody else" who is either a "bad cyclist" riding all slow on the sidewalk because we pushed them there with our stupid roads and stupid rules, or not riding at all. So perhaps the fault is not with the Irresponsible Rule Breaker, but rather with our shitty car culture, shitty road system, shitty government, and shitty society. You know, food for thought.

[Undecided]

Also, if you peek around at the roadgoing bicyclist population of the globe, you will find that most of them are not in fact enormous dudes with calves of steel who crack 30mph on the flats, but rather, regular people who go pretty slow and mostly just poke along! Not here though. Here we get the enormo buff bike guys who can ride very fast and usually on expensive bicycles, and then "everybody else" who is either a "bad cyclist" riding all slow on the sidewalk because we pushed them there with our stupid roads and stupid rules, or not riding at all. So perhaps the fault is not with the Irresponsible Rule Breaker, but rather with our shitty car culture, shitty road system, shitty government, and shitty society. You know, food for thought.

Yep. Part of the same system that makes even some cyclists, like the OP here, think that the choice is to "act like a car" or be totally in the wrong. The idea that systems and rules designed by car-centric people "should be" applied to cyclists is absurd. Appropriate rules and systems, to help everybody get along reasonably well would make a lot more sense to me.

[Nudelkopf]

Is there really any cyclist out there that stops and waits through an entire red light? I have never seen this once in the 3 years I have lived in Denver. Unless its a cyclist on the sidewalk waiting for the walk light...

I don't understand this... Don't you get hit by a car if you go through a red light?? Of course I wait through an entire red light!! Otherwise I'd be dead right now, right?