The Chainlink

http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/07/28/a-stop-sign-solution

Idaho’s stop-as-yield statute lets you ride safely and efficiently—without breaking the law.

For 26 years, cyclists in Idaho have rolled through stop signs—legally. According to that state’s law, when a cyclist approaches an intersection controlled by a stop sign, the cyclist must slow to “a reasonable speed,” but is not obligated to stop unless doing so is “required for safety.” After yielding to any vehicle that has the right of way, the cyclist may proceed. There’s more: Cyclists are required to stop at red lights, but once stopped may then proceed without waiting for the light to change, after first yielding to vehicles that have the right of way. In effect, this law allows cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs, and red lights as stop signs.

Views: 49

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Some previous discussion on this subject: here and here
Sorry for any duplication:I did search previous discussions but drew a blank, perhaps because the Idaho references are embedded in slightly different threads?
I'm all for the "Idaho stop" in Illinois. I've written about this issue on my bike law blog: http://thechicagobicycleadvocate.blogspot.com/2009/08/better-approa...
the Sounds reasonable to me. Personally, I ALWAYS show some manners and caution cause many times people don't even see you, especially now windows are pretty dirty from all the salt. I often see some these cats riding around like nut jobs especially down Damen just flying through the light at Fullerton gettig stuck in the middle of the road when they realize they gotta wait like everyone or get plowed into. It's funny people trying to act all hot azzz. Don't worry, cause I will scrape you up and make sure to get you to the Hospital or funeral in record time. Often too, I just an such an insecure reaction from hipsters and some other Ego inflated fool when they see I can outpace them on my 65lb tallbike not wearing gloves or much of a coat cause I am well adjusted to the cold now. Or it could be they just found out I am hooked up with their girlfriend who is 20 years younger and still don't really have a real job except to post this stuff during the day. Also who are these fools who take that curve on Logan Ave just West of Western. I mean there is a safe sidewalk section, why would anyone chance that blindspot especially on a cold day when everyones windows are covered in dirt. No amount of flashing lights are gonna save you from someone coming up behind you around that 40 meter curve. Get ready for a second ghost bike, I will donate the next one for whoever is gonna bite the concrete around that particular section.
As I argued in my blog post last August, many if not most bicyclists use the slow and go approach to stop signs already. But check out the video I posted on my blog. Someone in Philly took a video camera and went to a busy intersection to demonstrate just how common the "Idaho stop" is among motorists.
Chicago Bicycle Advocate said:
As I argued in my blog post last August, many if not most bicyclists use the slow and go approach to stop signs already. But check out the video I posted on my blog. Someone in Philly took a video camera and went to a busy intersection to demonstrate just how common the "Idaho stop" is among motorists.

A big reason why bicyclists maintain this law makes sense is the fact that a lot of bicyclists already ignore stop signs and red lights, so let’s simply codify that behavior and make it the law.
Let’s try an analogy: from my own, non-scientific observations I would say that 25-30 percent of drivers are either on the phone or text while driving. So why don’t we codify that behavior and make that law such that talking on the phone and texting while driving is legal? The argument of course is that texting while driving is dangerous. And yes, the lack of attention by drivers that are on the phone does annoy me. On the other hand, the majority of traffic participants likely does get annoyed by bicyclist’s attitude that running stop signs and red lights is OK and consider it dangerous behavior.

Idaho is a largely rural state where the largest city (Boise) has less than 200,000 citizens. I doubt that the traffic situation in Idaho can be compared with that in Chicago, where navigating traffic is one big compromise. So the argument that bicycling accidents in Idaho did not increase after the laws went into effect may or may not apply to Chicago.

The laws makes Idaho look like a very bike friendly state, but if you look at the history of the laws, specifically the red-light law, it doesn’t add up. In the book Pedaling Revolution, author Jeff Mapes makes the case that the red light law was approved because many intersections in Idaho have sensors in the ground to detect traffic. Bicycles rarely trip those sensors. The Idaho legislature did not want to spend the resources to update these intersections, so instead allowed bicyclists to proceed through a red light after coming to a full stop and yielding to traffic that has the ROW. That looks like a pragmatic solution to me, not a visionary one.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not against laws like those on the books in Idaho. I do however find it amusing that everyone seems to be in favor, simply because it would codify existing behavior and without examining the differences between Chicago and Idaho.

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service