Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 80 posts

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#41

Post by arthurdenture »

ivanhoe wrote: post #31

I don't see how it's safe to allow this for bikes, but it's not safe for cars? Why not just allowing everyone to "slow down and look for traffic" and then decide if it's safe to go through or not? That's basically what you do when there's no traffic lights and if people really slow down and look there will be rarely any problems with that. That's how roundabouts function, and they are generally very safe.

As discussed in the article, cars have worse field of vision, drive faster, and cause significantly more damage when they mis-judge whether it's safe to proceed.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#42

Post by mazelife »

skjdflsiugf wrote: post #14

As a cyclist of 40 years who's (hopefully) learned from their mistakes, I strongly disagree. Not only is it unsafe, pisses-off drivers and pedestrians, gives cyclists a bad name, but it's also completely unnecessary because you'll easily catch-up with cyclists who shot the lights at the next intersection anyway without even trying. That's what cyclists who shoot lights don't get is that it's actually not any faster i…

Maybe my understanding of what you mean by "shooting the lights" is wrong, but based on what I believe you're saying, this is not permitted under an Idaho stop law either. Cyclists may treat a red light like a stop sign. So they need to come to a full stop, then proceed through the intersection if it's clear of pedestrians and cars. That is very different from just blowing through a red light at an intersection.

As a cyclist myself, I've noticed a common case where you end up on the receiving end of driver frustration is when you come to a stop at a red light and are situated in the middle of a line of cars waiting for the green. When the light turns, it's going to take you longer to get up to speed than the cars, which often results in frustrated and dangerous behavior by the drivers behind you trying to get around. Having the option to be able to proceed through a red after stopping _when it's safe to do so_ lets you get a jump on things.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#43

Post by Nav_Panel »

aethos wrote: post #8
dogma1138 wrote: post #4

How about no. Stop signs were designed to prevent people being hit by crossing traffic. This isn't just a to protect the cyclists from being hit by cars, but to protect pedestrians from being hit by cyclists. I'm sorry but my experience of living in London in the past 4 years pretty much made me hate cyclists with passion. I find them considerably more dangerous and pesky than cars, they simply ignore all rules wheth…

I am a cyclist in NYC and I try my best to follow the mentality of "I am a car." I do not run red lights. When I see bikers do this it seems highly dangerous. Maybe the Idaho stop works in Idaho, but I doubt it would work in busy crossings in NYC.

Really? In Manhattan biking up and down avenues, I find it often makes more sense to run the red light. Riding next to unpredictable taxis and cars seems much more dangerous than getting ahead of the traffic cluster by running the red light (and the grid makes it pretty easy to see when someone's coming down the street you're crossing).

Part of my commute down 2nd Ave above the Queens-Midtown Tunnel doesn't have a dedicated bike lane, so I try to spend as little time riding side-by-side with cars as possible. Bike lanes make things easier.

On the other hand, biking in Brooklyn or Queens where the traffic is faster and less predictable (and thus more dangerous), I agree.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#44

Post by karma_vaccum123 »

The cop who gives you a ticket probably doesn't care about your Vox articles, Maclolm-Gladwell-grade pseudo statistics, or these comments.

At least in the Bay Area, cops are definitely willing to take the time to ticket cyclists. In Los Gatos where I live, the police will sometimes take a Saturday and just watch a busy intersection and literally ticket EVERY cyclist who blows through.

Of course we have also had a few cycling fatalities here, always the same story:cyclists blowing through intersections.

Don't do it. Don't be the asshole who makes life more difficult for other cyclists. No one cares about your bogus statistical arguments.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#45

Post by TheLarch »

vroombaprime wrote: post #36
TheLarch wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am surprised to hear you assert that there is no time saving to be had in running red lights. In my opinion it's just too bad for annoyed drivers. They are welcome to join us. What angry drivers usually don't get is that the equation is much different for cyclists. Our capacity to cause harm is a tiny fraction of that of a car. Also, we can't get tickets that raise our car insurance premium. Wheeeee!!!

"Our capacity to cause harm is a tiny fraction of that of a car." By rolling lights/stops you're making it harder for cars to notice and avoid you, making it more dangerous for yourself. I hope you don't find out that truth, though.

I appreciate what seems to be a sincere sentiment, but at the same time I don't feel like it's my place to point out to a stranger that her, say, sedentary lifestyle or drinking habit is a health risk.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#46

Post by karma_vaccum123 »

ddlatham wrote: post #26
gamblor956 wrote: post #18

Always used to see a guy cycling on my commute home. He'd roll through every stop sign and most traffic signals. (He explained one day that it "saved energy" for him to keep going...even though he cycled as "exercise...") I don't see him anymore. One day last year, he rolled through a red light in Koreatown, right into a truck which had the right of way. He was thrown from his bike about 20 feet and died from blunt f…

That's a sad anecdote. It doesn't seem to address the argument or actual safety data presented in the article.

Actually it does. If there is a 1% chance of a cyclists fatality for a certain illegal behavior, you might be that 1%. You will be 100% dead.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#47

Post by kordless »

ddlatham wrote: post #26
gamblor956 wrote: post #18

Always used to see a guy cycling on my commute home. He'd roll through every stop sign and most traffic signals. (He explained one day that it "saved energy" for him to keep going...even though he cycled as "exercise...") I don't see him anymore. One day last year, he rolled through a red light in Koreatown, right into a truck which had the right of way. He was thrown from his bike about 20 feet and died from blunt f…

That's a sad anecdote. It doesn't seem to address the argument or actual safety data presented in the article.

It's a data point and was used as such. The effects of breaking moving vehicle laws can be rationalized away when the mass of the vehicle moving is low. That doesn't preclude other incidences, such as this one, where someone who's job it is to drive a truck has to wrangle with the fact they killed someone. They guy who died could give two shits about the situation.

I saw a cyclist roll through a pedestrian crossing with people in it on his side of the road at the intersection at the end of my street. I rolled up to him in my car at the next light and told him he was breaking the law. He asked "but is it safe?". The implication is, with this leading question, is that he thought it was safe to do. What he didn't observe was the car behind him not slowing down for the pedestrians because they were watching him.

Stopping at a crosswalk, or yielding right of way, is an important rule because it gives VISUAL indicators to other drivers of nearby vehicles. It's a backup mechanism for safety at times. Rationalizing laws don't apply to oneself because they cause delay do not include the fact it the action may also be the difference between life and death - for someone else. Are we really going to rationalize away the fact driver may float lights more if they see bikes doing it as well?

The way Davis, CA handles this is to install special lights for bikes. I would assume they thought through it and decided floating lights is bad.

For the last 4 years, up until a few months ago, I had been riding at least 5-6 hours a day on fairly busy roads. I've seen a lot of shit that people do as a result of other's actions, including bikes, and I do NOT think bikes should be precluded from obeying traffic laws, especially when the only point to it might be to speed up a bike commute or "save energy". Whatever that means.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#48

Post by torgoguys »

skjdflsiugf wrote: post #14

As a cyclist of 40 years who's (hopefully) learned from their mistakes, I strongly disagree. Not only is it unsafe, pisses-off drivers and pedestrians, gives cyclists a bad name, but it's also completely unnecessary because you'll easily catch-up with cyclists who shot the lights at the next intersection anyway without even trying. That's what cyclists who shoot lights don't get is that it's actually not any faster i…

By "shot the lights" I assume you mean going through the intersection even though you're facing a red light. (?) I don't do this, except as allowed by Wisconsin's pretty new law (must wait at least a minute after which you're allowed to assume the lights are "sensing" lights and don't sense your presence). Unless I'm missing some subtlety, I don't understand how it doesn't save time to go through...

I am not an aggressive biker or driver and that you bring them up is confusing the thesis of the article. NOBODY is proposing making it legal to just blast through a red light. Perhaps this is what you mean by shooting the lights, but in that case you "strongly disagreeing" with the article implies you might want to reread what was proposed. The embedded video is an awesome explainer.

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#49

Post by bobowzki »

gamblor956 wrote: post #18

Always used to see a guy cycling on my commute home. He'd roll through every stop sign and most traffic signals. (He explained one day that it "saved energy" for him to keep going...even though he cycled as "exercise...") I don't see him anymore. One day last year, he rolled through a red light in Koreatown, right into a truck which had the right of way. He was thrown from his bike about 20 feet and died from blunt f…

Why do you say "exercise" with quotation?

Re: Why cyclists should be able to roll through stop signs, ride through red lights

#50

Post by TheLarch »

mazelife wrote: post #42
skjdflsiugf wrote: post #14

As a cyclist of 40 years who's (hopefully) learned from their mistakes, I strongly disagree. Not only is it unsafe, pisses-off drivers and pedestrians, gives cyclists a bad name, but it's also completely unnecessary because you'll easily catch-up with cyclists who shot the lights at the next intersection anyway without even trying. That's what cyclists who shoot lights don't get is that it's actually not any faster i…

Maybe my understanding of what you mean by "shooting the lights" is wrong, but based on what I believe you're saying, this is not permitted under an Idaho stop law either. Cyclists may treat a red light like a stop sign. So they need to come to a full stop, then proceed through the intersection if it's clear of pedestrians and cars. That is very different from just blowing through a red light at an intersection. As a…

I generally avoid busy roads, but when I am at a light I do enter the center of the lane. This is because one of the most common accidents that cyclists suffer is the "right hook" where a right-turning car does not see you. I accelerate hard in that case and don't ever get the feeling I'm hassling anyone much.
Post reply on HN